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: Parliamentary Reform Bill of 2238
Details
Submitted by[?]: Cruzada Tradicionalista Sekowana
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: December 2240
Description[?]:
| In the Council of Peers of the Union of Sekowo A LAW In order to streamline the legislature and resolve certain errors that led to no-democratic effects, we make two vital proposals. Section 1: Seats in the legislature will be distributed using a more proportional algorithm than the current one. Section 2: The number of Congressmen is set at 309. Respectfully submitted by David Blanchard, Chairman Revolutionary Liberal Struggle |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The method used to determine the number of seats each region receives in the national legislature.
Old value:: Equal representation, regardless of region population.
Current: A proportional algorithm that gives a very small advantage to larger regions.
Proposed: A pseudo-proportional algorithm that gives considerable advantage to smaller regions.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The total number of seats in the legislative assembly. Should be between 75 and 750.
Old value:: 725
Current: 450
Proposed: 309
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 23:21:16, June 06, 2006 CET | From | People's Liberation Army | To | Debating the Parliamentary Reform Bill of 2238 |
| Message | We leans towards approving this, yet we would like the distribution of seats to either stay the same or give more populous regions more representatives. |
| Date | 19:06:21, June 07, 2006 CET | From | Cruzada Tradicionalista Sekowana | To | Debating the Parliamentary Reform Bill of 2238 |
| Message | I thought this option was more of a compromise between the current arrangement, and a truly proportional system. Rather like the total representation of a small state in the US(America) Congress. The House is fairly proportional, but the Senate is equal for all states, therefore small states get an advantage in total representation relative to larger states. The current equal representation actually gives small states an even larger advantage. An example. Say there are two states, Estado A has 10 million people, Estado B has 40 million people, represented by a total of 50 seats in parliament. Given the current equal distribution: Estado A: 25 seats for 10 million people, each seat serves 400 kiloPersons; Estado B: 25 seats for 40 million people, each seat serves 1600 kP. Given the new algorithm: Estado A: 10 seats for 10 million people, each seat serves 1000 kP; Estado B: 40 seats for 40 million people, each seat serves 1000 kP. For a more democratic distribution. The disproportionality should only occur if the number of seats can't be divided evenly among the population. Perhaps if there were 51 seats, Estado A would get 11 seats. It should still be MORE egalitarian. I proposed the current arrangement because I misunderstood the meaning of the proposal:( Me Ineptum |
| Date | 22:12:46, June 07, 2006 CET | From | People's Liberation Army | To | Debating the Parliamentary Reform Bill of 2238 |
| Message | OOC: Under your new algorithm example, we need to change the proposal to give the advantage to larger regions which I would support. I know where you are coming from; however, the US system, larger states have the advantage over smaller states. Larger states have more congressional districts and as such have more representatives. Smaller states have less congressional districts and have less representatives. The Senators don't matter since every state has two. So in our nation, under your current proposed algorithm in giving the advantage to smaller states, the result would be that smaller states would have more representatives and larger states would have less. I think that is the opposite of what you are trying to achieve and hope you change the proposal to give the advantage to larger states. The size of the state is referring to population, just FYI. |
| Date | 09:24:13, June 08, 2006 CET | From | Cruzada Tradicionalista Sekowana | To | Debating the Parliamentary Reform Bill of 2238 |
| Message | Actually, the US system gives more representation to states with smaller population. In proportion to population. R + S = k*P + 2 Our previous system gives much greater representation to smaller states. Proportionally. This is a compromise between, the notion of small states get the same representation as large states and all states are proportionally represented. |
| Date | 09:26:20, June 08, 2006 CET | From | Cruzada Tradicionalista Sekowana | To | Debating the Parliamentary Reform Bill of 2238 |
| Message | After trying to come up with more than 28 new names for representatives, I am eager for a smaller representative assembly. |
| Date | 03:41:09, June 09, 2006 CET | From | People's Liberation Army | To | Debating the Parliamentary Reform Bill of 2238 |
| Message | OOC: No, the US doesn't give more representation to smaller states. Example: Largest state: California has 53 Congressional Districts equalling 53 Representatives. California's population is 33,871,648 meaning 639,087 are represented by each person. Smallest state: Delaware has 1 Congressional District equalling 1 Representative. Delaware's population is 786,512 meaning 786,512 are represented by that person. Middle state: Arizona has 8 Congressional Districts equalling 8 Representatives. Arizona's population is 5,130,632 meaning 641,329 are represented by each person. I only gave you three states... I could analyze all 50, but I won't. The fact of the matter is that each state's representatives represents roughly the same amount of people, with smaller states carrying a larger burden than larger ones. While this isn't true if you factor in Senators, every state has 2 Senators and the Senate is a completely different house. Regardless of their presence, people in Delaware have 1 Representative, period whereas people in larger states must talk to the Representative of their district. Here, we only have 1 House and as such cannot compare a unicameral assembly to a bicameral one. That is why I only analyzed the House of Representatives. As such, we should give advantage to larger states so that the population representation is equal. Notice that we do not have another house in Sekowo and cannot skew the numbers with Senators... |
| Date | 23:15:55, June 09, 2006 CET | From | Cruzada Tradicionalista Sekowana | To | Debating the Parliamentary Reform Bill of 2238 |
| Message | The pseudo proportional algorithm WILL do that. The favor given to smaller states will only be in proportion. In actuality, the larger states will get larger representation than smaller states. Just not proportionately more. A state with ten times the population of another, smaller state, might get only eight times as many representatives. This is meant to be a compromise with the current system, in which a state with ten times the population will get exactly as many representatives as the smaller state. Personally, I would like to know the algorithms in use so that I could compare them with precision. I would also like a multicameral legislature. Tricameral: One has equal representation for each state - The Council of States; One has proportional representation for each state with favor for smaller states - The Federal Council; One has proportional representation of the entire national population - The People's Council. That can't happen in this game... |
| Date | 23:20:28, June 09, 2006 CET | From | Cruzada Tradicionalista Sekowana | To | Debating the Parliamentary Reform Bill of 2238 |
| Message | I also think people who work harder or are smarter or are just luckier should get more goodies. I just don't think anybody works hard enough, is smart enough, or should really be lucky enough to be a multi-billionaire while other people, WITH JOBS, are working to live in the back of their car and eat ramen and tuna. The all-caps isn't shouting, I just can't use italics here for emphasis. |
| Date | 23:24:08, June 09, 2006 CET | From | Cruzada Tradicionalista Sekowana | To | Debating the Parliamentary Reform Bill of 2238 |
| Message | I'll put his up for a vote. Hopefully the PLA will regard the smaller-than-proportional advantage the new electoral algorithm gives to larger states as better than the complete lack of an advantage given to larger states currently. |
| Date | 02:46:44, June 10, 2006 CET | From | People's Liberation Army | To | Debating the Parliamentary Reform Bill of 2238 |
| Message | I see your point with the pseudo proportional algorithm... while we cannot view the actual formulas, we hope to see what you say will happen. If not we will support an immediate change. As stated earlier in debate, we lean towards voting for this and Carlos Marķa de Alvear is willing to break the tie. |
| Date | 06:16:13, June 14, 2006 CET | From | Cruzada Tradicionalista Sekowana | To | Debating the Parliamentary Reform Bill of 2238 |
| Message | It might have been vaguely interesting to know what objections Manche andDrake had to this and the Aesthetic reform. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||
| yes | Total Seats: 295 | ||
| no |
Total Seats: 280 | ||
| abstain | Total Seats: 6 |
| Random fact: If there are no parties in your nation with seats, feel free to visit the forum and request an early election on the Early Election Requests thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4362 |
| Random quote: "This country has far more problems than it deserves and far more solutions than it applies." - Ralph Nader |