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: Disputandum: Princeps Senatus
Details
Submitted by[?]: Factio Unitatis Patriae
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill is a resolution. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: April 4479
Description[?]:
| Debate Regarding the Powers and Responsibilities of the Princeps Senatus Senators, Following on from the discussion which took place during the reading of the bill Tiburtian Law on Classes: (http://classic.particracy.net/viewbill.php?billid=584917), I now call for an open debate regarding the powers and responsibilities of the Princeps Senatus. Mainly, I wish to gauge opinion on what ceremonial and real powers this role should carry with it and also the method of appointment to this role. Currently, a member from the party with the plurality in the Senate is appointed to the role; however, there is also a school of thought that, in fact, the role should go to a senator from the largest party which is in government. This would ensure there is always a majority leader (Princeps Senatus) and a minority leader (Dux Oppositionis) from different parties in the senate. Once we have a general consensus, I will put together a proposed constitutional amendment bill so that the role can be formally entered into law. Quintus Viridius Fabianus Senator; Party Leader |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:38:09, October 26, 2018 CET | From | Factio Republicana Socialistica | To | Debating the Disputandum: Princeps Senatus |
| Message | Senators, We believe that the Princeps Senatus should be analogous to the position of Speaker in other democracies. The Princeps Senatus should serve as the presiding officer of the Senate and have primarily ceremonial powers, including the power to represent the institution of the Senate and to embody its auctoritas (moral authority and prestige), distinct from the potestas exercised by the People. As such the Princeps Senatus should have the power to moderate debate, determine the time allocated for each Senator wishing to speak on the floor, and discipline Senators who violate parliamentary procedure. We explicitly oppose granting the Princeps Senatus the power to determine which bills reach the floor, and if such power is granted the Senate should be able to circumvent such opposition through a discharge petition. Under the current constitutional arrangement we believe that the selection process for the Princeps Senatus should be amended so that they are always the majority leader by being selected by the largest party in government. That is because under our semipresidential system the Senate majority is the governing majority, and the largest party is not by definition a part of that majority. To compensate for this the power of the Dux Oppositionis should be enhanced, so that the Princeps and the Dux have similar powers and responsibilities, necessary to avoid a winner-take-all effect. However, if we are to adopt a presidential system, which is now our preference, then the current selection system should stay in place. Under a presidential system the Senate majority would be sufficiently distinct from the government to allow a plurality election system for the Princeps Senatus. But in this case we believe the position of Dux Oppositionis should be abolished. We are eager to hear the other Senators' thoughts on this matter. We fear that the recent unnecessary conflict between Senator Numitor and Princeps Senatus Adia Pastora could have easily been avoided had there been more clarity in what concerns the powers of the Princeps Senatus relative to those of ordinary Senators. Caecilia Bousaid Caesar |
| Date | 16:36:10, October 27, 2018 CET | From | Clara Aurora - COSIRA | To | Debating the Disputandum: Princeps Senatus |
| Message | Hon. Senators, I am not at all opposed to regulating my powers, and in fact, I appreciate the initiative presented by the government. I have devoted a large part of my life to jurisprudence, and this allows me, relatively, to be a neutral figure, all that allows me to belong to a specific party. As Caesar has indicated, the powers of representation of this House and the regulation of debates are correct points, but, in my view, insufficient. What happens if, in this case, a party openly advocates slavery or the persecution of minorities once it reaches power, and that it has the necessary majority? There should be powers to regulate that, and hence the initiative that it is the Princeps Senatus that can block legislation only in the event that it affects in any way the Constitution (OOC: RP Law), until the Supreme Court of our nation rules about its legality, and not morality. If my requests are going to be ignored, the abilities of the Dux Oppositionis should be increased notably, because otherwise, we would enter into a notable democratic deficiency in our country. Adia Pastora Princeps Senatus |
| Date | 18:28:32, October 27, 2018 CET | From | Factio Republicana Socialistica | To | Debating the Disputandum: Princeps Senatus |
| Message | Senators, I believe Princeps Senatus Pastora is overly skeptical of the ability of our voters to respect minority rights and overly confident in the ability of political and judicial elites to defend them. Princeps Pastora raises the possibility of a political majority in the Senate aiming to persecute unpopular minorities, responding to the demands of myopic and prejudiced tyrannous majorities. I do not doubt that there are many voters in Selucia that are sincerely racist or anti-democratic, or that there are those politicians that cater to such voters for political gain. But I highly doubt that making our political system less majoritarian would prevent these outcomes. When popular prejudice against a minority is common, political and judicial elites are likely to share this prejudice. The Princeps asks what would stop an anti-democratic majority from implementing slavery or persecution of minorities. I ask instead what would prevent entrenched judicial and political minorities from using anti-majoritarian systems for their own benefit. If the Princeps Senatus and the Supreme Court can prevent legislation targeted against ethnic minorities, then they can use the same power to preempt legislation against the privileges of economic minorities. If the Princeps Senatus can put an end to a bill implementing slavery, the Princeps Senatus could also prevent a bill targeting lobbying or implementing economic redistribution, in the name of either freedom of speech or economic liberty. And the sad fact is, it is the poor that have the least recourse to such anti-majoritarian measures, and it is the wealthy that know how to use law and the courts to their own advantage. In the end I believe you will find that it is the poor who are more honest and more loving of liberty. Although the people often errs when it comes to general principles, when it comes to particulars, much more often than any similarly situated elite, the people will decide correctly. Which is why we oppose the introduction of undue restrictions on the ability of the Senate to legislate. Not because we believe the Senate should be open to persecute minorities, but because we fear that such restrictions will benefit the economic elite far more than they will the common people. We also believe, for this very reason, that the powers of the Dux Oppositionis should be increased, but not too much. Otherwise, if the powers of the government and the opposition are identical, then what is the point of elections? Why even bother trying to figure out whom the people want to win and whom to lose, if the end result is the same? We should not fear the tyranny of the majority. We should fear the far more real and less visible tyranny of the minority. On this note we must congratulate Senator Fabianus for his wisdom in seeing the faults in our current constitutional system and his proposal to move our democracy in a more majoritarian direction. Dispersal of power is necessary to prevent tyranny, but too much dispersal renders democracy meaningless. So our point still stands: either we reform the current Senatorial procedure by placing the office of the Princeps Senatus in the hands of the governing majority while maintaining semipresidentialism, or we adopt a presidential system and keep the current procedure. Caecilia Bousaid Caesar |
| Date | 11:17:33, October 29, 2018 CET | From | Factio Unitatis Patriae | To | Debating the Disputandum: Princeps Senatus |
| Message | Senators, Given that both parties who have taken part in this debate so far agree that the powers of the Dux Oppositionis should be increased, particularly if the semi-presidential system of government remains in place, I ask them to clarify what extra responsibilities should be attached to this role? Quintus Viridius Fabianus Senator; Party Leader |
| Date | 12:05:16, October 29, 2018 CET | From | Factio Republicana Socialistica | To | Debating the Disputandum: Princeps Senatus |
| Message | Senators, Our proposal is for the Dux Oppositionis to have the power to scrutinize the actions of the government and the governing majority, to develop alternative policies, and to hold the executive and the governing majority accountable for its actions and statements. The Dux should also play a junior role in assisting the Princeps Senatus in its duties of maintaining and overseeing parliamentary procedure. It goes without saying that, if these powers are implemented, the system for electing the Princeps Senatus need to be modified. Caecilia Bousaid Caesar |
| Date | 18:51:54, November 01, 2018 CET | From | Factio Unitatis Patriae | To | Debating the Disputandum: Princeps Senatus |
| Message | OOC: Moved to vote for archiving. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 29 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 0 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 721 |
| Random fact: The players in a nation have a collective responsibility to prevent confusion by ensuring unofficial or outdated bills labelled as "Cultural Protocols" are removed from their nation page. |
| Random quote: "I am loyal to the ideas, not to the institutions." - Cyro Aquila, former Selucian politician |