Electoral Reform Bill

[Patroklus Murakami]

I've posted an amended 'Electoral Reform Bill' [url=http://forums.neufreistadt.info/viewtop ... 3:368txg86]here[/url:368txg86] on the CSDF sub-forum. It will be discussed on Thursday at our regular weekly CSDF meeting at 3pm in The Red House on the Lowland Road, (Neufreistadt 123, 33). I am posting it here so that others have a chance to comment.

[Flyingroc Chung]

I'm still not sure I understand exactly how STV works, can you provide an example of how a ballot would look like, under this system?

[Patroklus Murakami]

FR

Sure. The ballot paper for the last election would have looked something like this:

"Rank the following candidates in order of preference. You may rank all of the candidates if you wish, or only some of them.

Beathan Vale (Simplicity Party)
Brian Livingston (Simplicity Party)
Bromo Ivory (CARE)
Jo Sapeur (CARE)
Jon Seattle (CSDF)
Mizou Vavoom (CARE)
Moon Adamant (CSDF)
Patroklus Murakami (CSDF)
ThePrincess Parisi (CARE)"

[Justice Soothsayer]

Thanks for the explanation, Pat.

It seems that the proposed system would allow for, or even encourage "plunking" one's vote for a particular individual (or a small number of individuals). No, not that kind of [url=http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... g:3n1dz4ds]plunking[/url:3n1dz4ds], but this kind: "Plunking involves voting for only one candidate when you have the option of voting for more than one candidate. It is a way to maximize the effect of a vote for a single candidate in a multicandidate race." http://starbulletin.com/2000/11/08/news/story6.html

I'm posting this not to use the term plunking negatively, but to indicate what I think the effect of this proposal would be.

[michelmanen]

Well, if a citizen only wants to vote for some candidates and not for others, why shouldn't they be free to do so? Let's say someone truly dislikes CARE. The person will rank CSDF, DPU and SP candidates - being free to decide whether to do so in order of individual or party preference - but not rank CARE candidates at all. NOT ranking is clear and legitimate choice of a voter and entirely legitimate. Being forced to rank candidates one does not wish to isn't.

[michelmanen]

This will be CARE's Proposed [b:21x2rngo][u:21x2rngo]Constitutional Amendment - Electoral Reform[/u:21x2rngo][/b:21x2rngo] (subject to change and confirmation at the CARE Meeting to be held this week).

The following sections of the Constitution are amended to read as follows:

[b:21x2rngo]Article I, Section 1 - The Representative Assembly [/b:21x2rngo]

The Representative Assembly (RA) is the legislative institution of the CDS, composed of democratically elected CDS citizens. Its governmental role is to pass laws and its service role is to promote the CDS and perform long-term community planning.

[b:21x2rngo]Section 2 - The Representative Assembly Body [/b:21x2rngo]

Representatives are elected by means of the Single Transferable Vote in Multi-Member Constituencies. The minimum number of votes needed to elect a representative is calculated using the 'Droop Quota'.

The CDS is composed of one electoral constituency and will remain so as long as its population is inferior to 400 citizens.

The total number of seats in the RA is determined by law with a minimum of five seats and a maximum of forty seats.

Each RA member has a single vote in the RA. Any vacancies arising in the RA between elections will be filled by the candidate(s) to the RA with most votes at the last election unable able to win a seat at that time or, if none available, by a by-election.

The Representative Assembly shall serve for a term of six months. New RAs shall take office on 1 February and 1 August. Elections shall be held over a 168 hour period beginning at noon SLT on the Saturday before the 16th of the month prior to the new RAs taking office. In the event of a server outage which prevents citizens from casting ballots and which lasts more than 12 hours, the Dean of the SC has the authority to adjust or extend the election schedule.

[b:21x2rngo]Section 3 - The Representative Assembly Leader [/b:21x2rngo]

The newly-elected Representative Assembly will elect, at its first meeting, a Leader of the Representative Assembly, from amongst RA candidates nominated by fellow RA members during that meeting.

The vote for the LRA will be secret and take place in the presence of all RA members, except in case of outmost urgency, in which case the vote will be conducted by all RA members off-world, secretly, over a one-week period, by the Dean of the SC, with no individual votes being divulged until the final result is known or the next ballot must begin, depending on the vote's outcome.

The LRA will be responsible for the political / legislative direction of the RA.

The LRA will give, during the second meeting of the new RA, a speech outlining his / her government's legislative agenda for the current RA session.

The LRA will resign if he or she loses a Vote of Confidence in the LRA, being the CDS budget, or any other vote declared as such either by a) the LRA or b) a majority of the RA.

[b:21x2rngo]Article IV, Section 2 - The Faction Body [/b:21x2rngo]

All faction members must be citizens of the Confederation of the Democratic Simulators and must join a special SL group created for the sole purpose of running for seats in the RA. No citizen is required to be part of a faction.

The minimum faction size is three citizens. No later than 15 days prior to the opening of the polls, faction members will report to the SC Dean their willingness or unwillingness to serve in the RA.

[b:21x2rngo]
Article V, Sections 2 - Limitation of Terms and Non-Cumulation of Offices[/b:21x2rngo]

No CDS public official may serve in any one CDS governmental or quasi-governmental capacity (as defined by the RA from time to time) for more than two terms, consecutive or not.

No CDS public official may occupy at any one time more than one CDS governmental or quasi-governmental office (as defined by the RA from time to time)

--------------------

This will be CARE's Proposed [b:21x2rngo][u:21x2rngo]RA Size and CDS Structure of Governance Bill[/u:21x2rngo][/b:21x2rngo] (subject to change and confirmation at the CARE Meeting to be held this week).

1. When the CDS has a population less than or equal to 400 citizens in total, the number of representative seats in the RA is equal to the odd whole number nearest to 10% of the population, rounded down.

2. When the CDS population rises above 300, the RA will pass a law to adjust the size of the RA when the population grows beyond 400.

3. When the CDS population rises above 300, the RA will pass a law setting up a Federal Commission to determine a) whether the CDS should adopt a multi-level structure of governance, b) the powers and responsibilities of each level of governance, c) any revision to the institutions of the upper level of governance; and d) the number of electoral constituencies in the CDS.

--------------------

I will attend your meeting to determine the extent to which CARE and CSDF can arrive at a common position on these matters.

[Flyingroc Chung]

Michel, can you summarize the difference between the CSDF's proposal and CARE's?

[michelmanen]

Sure. These are the proposed CARE changes which differ from those of the CSDF, article by article:
[b:3u7wxeer]
Article I, Section 1 - The Representative Assembly: [/b:3u7wxeer] no reference to the different ideological views of RA members; wording updated to reflect we are not "a city", but the CDS.

[b:3u7wxeer]Section 2 - The Representative Assembly Body:[/b:3u7wxeer]

CDS remains one electoral constituency until it reaches 400 citizens.

Removal of specification that factions control their RA seats (inconsistent with the new election method). Replacement of any vacancies in the RA between elections is done not by factions (inconsistent with the new election method), but by "runner-up" candidates in the election -or, if none available, by means of by-elections.
[b:3u7wxeer]
Section 3 - The Representative Assembly Leader[/b:3u7wxeer]

LRA position updated to relflect removal of faction vote and ensure stable, efficient, democratic and accountable government, as follows:

a) LRA will be elected by a majority of RA members by secret ballot;

b) LRA will be responsible for the political / legislative direction of the RA and will give, during the second meeting of the new RA, a speech outlining his / her government's legislative agenda for the current RA session.

c) LRA will resign if he or she will lose a Vote of Confidence, being the CDS budget, or any other vote declared as such either by a) the LRA or b) a majority of the RA.
[b:3u7wxeer]
Article IV, Section 2 - The Faction Body[/b:3u7wxeer]: all faction powers and duties relative to the old election method are deleted; reference to CDS citizens being members of only one faction removed.
[b:3u7wxeer]
Article V, Sections 2 - Limitation of Terms and Non-Cumulation of Offices [/b:3u7wxeer]: replaces the current outdated [u:3u7wxeer]Exclusivity[/u:3u7wxeer] article with the same number and: a) enlarges the non-cumulation stipulation to all CDS governmental and quasi-governmental offices; b) allows the RA to define, from time to time, what a "quasi-governmental" institution is; and c) adds a two-term limit (consecutive or not) for any *one* public office.

The CARE proposal also amends the CSDF [u:3u7wxeer]RA Size Bill[/u:3u7wxeer] by renaming it [b:3u7wxeer][u:3u7wxeer]RA Size and CDS Structure of Governance Bill[/u:3u7wxeer][/b:3u7wxeer] and stipulating the holding of a Federal Commission to be convened when the CDS population rises over 300 citizens, to determine whether the CDS should adopt a federal structure and multiple voting constituencies.

All these changes are entirely interrelated to the changes in our electoral system and must be considered as a whole. CARE has commented on each of them on both the CARE and CDS forums and intends to present them as a unit.

An [b:3u7wxeer][u:3u7wxeer]Executive Powers' Act[/u:3u7wxeer][/b:3u7wxeer], stipulating direct popular election of the Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor by all CDS citizens at the same time as elections of the RA will be introduced separately.

[Patroklus Murakami]

Michel

It would be helpful if you took out the other CARE-proposed constitutional changes from this proposal. You have added in provisions which mean the LRA would be selected by the RA rather than through the public vote, term limits which restrict voter choice and a provision on non-cumulation of offices which would allow the RA to declare any body an 'NGO' and prevent people from holding public office.

These additions have nothing to do with the reform of the electoral system i.e. the change from our current system to STV and need further discussion.

[michelmanen]

[quote:2ux3yoom]You have added in provisions which mean the LRA would be selected by the RA rather than through the public vote[/quote:2ux3yoom]

Currently, the Leader of the RA is automatically appointed based on which faction obtains most seats and which individual within that faction receives most votes. As we have seen in the last RA, a faction winning 2 seats out of 5 is capable of having one of their members designated automatically as LRA, and in turn the DPU faction's 6 members (4 of which were not in the RA) effectively decided which individual held this important position. In fact, last term, only 2 members of the RA out of 5 had a say as to who the LRA would be; this term, only 3 out of seven had a chance to do so.

This current state of affairs: a) is entirely undemocratic, in that not all RA members, but only the few members of a faction with the most seats (but not necessarily a majority or even a plurality) elected the LRA; b) does in no way represent the actual situation in the RA, where the LRA is in no way assured of a governing majority; c) for the same reason, is ineffective in that the LRA may well not be able to provide adequate leadership for the RA and actively pursue the adoption of a specfic legislative agenda; and d) unaccountable, in that the LRA cannot be held to account or removed by the RA, save for impeachment -which is an entirely inappropriate procedure for most political purposes (failure to control a majority in the RA and have key legislative initiatives, such as the CDS Budget, adopted).

The proposed role of the LRA is somewhat modeled on the roles and functions of the British Prime Minister and the German Chancellor, in that it ensures a majority government whilst allowing parties to arrive at a common legislative agenda; note that the party with most seats is not necessarily assured to form the government or appoint the LRA (for example: in the elected LRA, SP and CARE could set up a coalition government and appoint an LRA from either party) (advantage: efficiency, leadership, accountabilty).

It also draws upon the constitution of the old Roman Republic, where two Consuls shared power, but streamlines the role of each of the two to avoid overlaps and power struggles (Chancellor would focus on executive-organisational matters, LRA on legislative - party political matters).

The relationship between Chancellor and LRA would be similar to that between French President and Prime Minister, where the French President Chairs the Council of Ministers which includes the Prime Minister, but the Prime Minister is responsible for the Legislative Agenda in the Assemblee Nationale. Critically, and different from the French model, the LRA is independent from the CDS Chancellor, who does not appoint or dismiss the LRA, and cannot dismiss the RA and call for anticipated RA elections. This gives each of the two an independent legitimacy, power base, and function, while requiring the two to work together.

[quote:2ux3yoom], term limits which restrict voter choice[/quote:2ux3yoom]

To the contrary. They enlarge voter choice by making sure CDS citizens are not forced to vote for the same people over and over again. We cleary have a very different conception of "choice" than you.

[quote:2ux3yoom] and a provision on non-cumulation of offices which would allow the RA to declare any body an 'NGO' and prevent people from holding public office.[/quote:2ux3yoom]

It does no such thing. The RA would be allowed to determine which NGO, by reason of its position, power and responsibilites is so important to the CDS as to be considered "quasi-governmental" (CARE believes the Guild currently in one such organisation, and any future organisation controlling and managing the CDS Media/ Web Portal will be another). It simply makes sure that a) no CDS official is faced with a real or potential conflict of interest (the very reason you resigned from the SC and why Jon is not running for the position of Guild Secretary), that he or she can focus on one job at a time and do it well, and that CDS citizens have as wide a choice as possible in their public officials. No one stops a CDS citizen from running for another public office once his or her current mandate in another such office expires.

[quote:2ux3yoom]These additions have nothing to do with the reform of the electoral system i.e. the change from our current system to STV and need further discussion.[/quote:2ux3yoom]

These clauses have *Everything* to do with a coherent and comprehensive electoral system and *must* be discussed at the same time with the transition from the current voting system to the STV system. The fact that you wish to break it all up in little pieces and isolate each element in order to cherry pick what you like or don't is irrelevant to the overall needs for consistency, comprehensiveness, efficiency, accountability and democratic legitimcy of our electoral system.

This is why CARE will also introduce the [u:2ux3yoom]Executive Powers Bill[/u:2ux3yoom] at the same time for discussion, although as a separate bill, for clarity's sake.

[Patroklus Murakami]

What do you call it when a legislator adds something unconnected to another bill in order to get something passed they know wouldn't pass on its own? I know this is sometimes used in American politics to get 'pork barrel' type measures passed. Perhaps someone could remind me of the term?

I'm afraid this is what this proposal of Michel's looks like. The original CSDF proposal was for changing our electoral system so that all voters, not just the faction members, could rank all of the candidates they wanted to vote for. It was deliberately drafted so as not to make any further constitutional changes apart from consequential ones. This CARE proposal adds in a number of additional constitutional amendments as outlined above. Michel may think they are desirable but they have nothing to do with the original proposal and they look as if they've been shoehorned/grafted onto the CSDF proposal in order to get a number of unpopular measures through on the back of electoral reform.

Well, Michel tells us he plans to come to our meeting later today. We'll see if the CSDF membership agree that all these additional changes are needed.

[Bromo Ivory]

Not sure it would be Pork Barrel in this case since they are generally all in the same theme...

[michelmanen]

There is a huge difference between grafting pork barrel proposals on a bill (such a the construction of a bridge in a Representative's district added to a Minimum Wage Increase Bill) and ensuring that all elements of an electoral system are modified in a coherent and efficient manner so as to implement a consistent, accountable, effective and legitimate electoral system.

The Bill will be open to discussion and amendment in the RA, so if any measure is truly unpopular in the RA, RA members will be at liberty to modify it.

I would indeed like to see CARE and CSDF differences narrowed to a minimum before the actual RA meeting, so that CARE members can consider the text and that the RA debate focus on those items on which we truly disagree. I plan to come by around 4 pm slt, to give you all a chance to talk about these things without me being present..

[Flyingroc Chung]

I think the word Pat is looking for is "rider".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rider(politics)

[Patroklus Murakami]

This PCA and Bill have been amended slightly following the CSDF meeting last night.

---------------------------------------------------------------
[b:3t8qee2i]Proposed Constitutional Amendment - Electoral Reform[/b:3t8qee2i]
The following sections of the Constitution are amended to read as follows:

[i:3t8qee2i]Article I, Section 1 - The Representative Assembly[/i:3t8qee2i]
The Representative Assembly (RA) is a body of democratically elected citizens which represent different ideological views. Its governmental role is to pass laws and its service role is to promote the CDS and perform long-term planning.

[i:3t8qee2i]Section 2 - The Representative Assembly Body[/i:3t8qee2i]
Representatives are elected by means of the Single Transferable Vote. The minimum number of votes needed to elect a representative is calculated using the 'Droop Quota'.

The total number of seats in the RA is determined by law with a minimum of five seats and a maximum of forty seats.

Each faction controls their seats and may replace members or fill seats due to vacancies. Each seat receives a single vote.

The Representative Assembly shall serve for a term of six months. New RAs shall take office on 1 February and 1 August. Elections shall be held over a 168 hour period beginning at noon SLT on the Saturday before the 16th of the month prior to the new RAs taking office. In the event of a server outage which prevents citizens from casting ballots and which lasts more than 12 hours, the Dean of the SC has the authority to adjust or extend the election schedule.

[i:3t8qee2i]Section 3 - The Representative Assembly Leader[/i:3t8qee2i]
The Leader of the RA is the member of the faction which has the most seats who was elected earliest during the count. In the event of a tie between two or more factions (or between two or more candidates of the same faction), the tie will be broken by one (in the event of a two way tie) or more (in the case of a three or more way tie) best of three games of Rock, Paper, Scissors. The games shall be overseen by the Dean of the SC, who shall be the custodian of the official city RPS device.

[i:3t8qee2i]Article IV, Section 2 - The Faction Body[/i:3t8qee2i]
All faction members must be citizens of the Confederation of the Democratic Simulators and must join a special SL group created for the sole purpose of running for seats in the RA. No citizen is required to be part of a faction and cannot be a member of more than one faction at the same time.

The minimum faction size is three citizens. No later than 15 days prior to the opening of the polls, faction members will report to the SC Dean their willingness or unwillingness to serve in the RA. Members rank individuals in their own faction through their vote in the election. Individuals will learn their ranks and those winning seats will have their ranks revealed, otherwise all ranks will remain secret. If a member retires from the RA, the faction member with the next highest ranking takes the seat on the RA.

In the event that a faction, via resignation or impeachment, exhausts its list of eligible RA members drawn up at the previous general election during the course of an RA term:

1) If the faction no longer meets the constitutional requirements or if no members of the faction are willing to serve, there shall be a special election to fill, for the remainder of the term, the seats left vacant.

2) If the faction the list of which is exhausted still meets constitutional requirements as spelled out in Article IV, and there are members of that faction who did not stand in that constituency in the previous general election willing to fill the vacated seats, members of the affected faction shall rank those candidates to fill the vacated seats as they do in the general election.

--------------------
[b:3t8qee2i]RA Size Bill[/b:3t8qee2i]

1. When the CDS has a population less than or equal to 400 citizens in total, the number of representative seats in the RA is equal to the odd whole number nearest to 10% of the population, rounded down.

2. When the CDS population rises above 300, the RA will pass a law to adjust the size of the RA when the population grows beyond 400.