Election of the LRA and direct election of the Chancellor

[mtlundquist]

Election of the LRA and direct election of Chancellor
Election of LRA by the members of the RA
This amendment establishes a change to the appointment of the Leader of the RA (LRA) . The aim of this amendment is to:
a) define the procedure for the election of a LRA
Historically LRA has been appointed directly following the elections six monthly to the RA. The party with the largest vote and the elected member with the largest personal vote within that party has been appointed LRA.
The current 2008 January election created the situation where three parties were elected to two seats each and a fourth to a single seat. There is therefore no overall obvious lead party/ faction within the RA albeit that parties did get slightly more or less of the vote, as will always happen in any election.
It is also not necessarily the case that the member with the highest proportion of the vote in the party with the highest proportion of the vote is the best skilled person to lead the RA administratively.
It does not allow for the resignation of an LRA if that person wishes to remain a RA member.
Confusion was recently caused when the faction that held the LRA seat under the current rules of appointment resigned en mass from their RA seats. Clear rules for the election of LRA would avoid this confusion in the future
This amendment responds to the concerns raised.
Amendment
1. The LRA is elected from within the ranks of the RA members by a simple majority vote of the RA at the start of the term of each six month RA session or at such time as the LRA post falls vacate for whatever reason.
2. The election for LRA shall be from candidates amongst RA member volunteers.
3. The LRA is permitted to resign from the post of LRA but may retain their seat in the RA.
4. The LRA may be removed from post prior to the expiration of the term of office by at least a two thirds vote of the Representative Assembly. This represents a vote of no confidence in the LRA.
Transition arrangements
It is recognised that adoption of this amendment creates a problem of transition from one method of appointment to another. It is not the intention of this amendment to raise concerns about any current incumbent LRA. Therefore the following transition arrangements are proposed.
a. That the current incumbent LRA continues to serve as LRA.
b. That clauses 3 and/or 4 above take immediate effect upon the adoption of this bill into legislation and therefore provide a mechanism, should it be needed, for the resignation or removal of the LRA subject to the terms in clauses 3 and 4

Direct Election of Chancellor

This amendment establishes a change to the appointment of the Chancellor. The aim of this amendment is to:
a) define the procedure for the election of a Chancellor.
Concern has been raised that the election of the LRA by the members of the RA would remove from citizens a more direct say in the process of government. The logic being that the faction with the largest number of votes has therefore a mandate from the citizens and fields the LRA. Further logic then says the LRA controls the agenda of the RA in accordance with the perceived wishes of the voters.

Acknowledging the desire to maintain a representation in government comparable to that perceived in the previous rules to appoint the LRA its proposed to change to a direct citizen election to the post of Chancellor. Currently the Chancellor post is elected by the members of the RA.

Amendment
1. The Chancellor is elected by direct vote of CDS citizens.
2. The election shall be held every six months. These elections shall begin April 15th and October 15th. The poles shall be open ten days.
3. The Chancellor of CDS shall be selected from among any CDS citizen who shall make application to the RA within ten (10) days prior to the election.
4. The Chancellor may not be elected to or serve on the Representative Assembly, nor serve on the Scientific Council. The Chancellor may hold a position in the Artisanal Collective but may not vote therein.
5. Each citizen shall be allowed a single vote for their prefered candidate. The candidate with the highest number of votes cast in their favour shall be elected Chancellor.
6. In the event of a tie the SC shall conduct a game of rock, paper scissors.
7. In the event that the Chancellor resigns or is removed from office a further interim election is held.

Transition arrangements
It is recognised that adoption of this amendment creates a problem of transition from one method of appointment to another. It is not the intention of this amendment to raise concerns about any current incumbent Chancellor. Therefore the following transition arrangements are proposed.
a. That the current incumbent Chancellor continues to serve as Chancellor.
b. That the first election for Chancellor be October 2008.

[Justice Soothsayer]

First, I hope that the RA will consider these as two separate proposals, rather than as one.

Second, as to the RA's election of the LRA, if there is more than one candidates, would multiple ballots used? What happens in the event of a tie, which could easily be anticipated, especially in light of the partisan divisions at the beginning of this term. Rock, paper, scissors, anyone?

[Beathan]

Justice --

I have in mind a process more in keeping with the Papal conclave. Can anyone script white and black smoke for us?

Beathan

[Justice Soothsayer]

If the conclave is held in the Rathaus, there are plenty of clouds around.

[Cindy Ecksol]

Justice --

I have in mind a process more in keeping with the Papal conclave. Can anyone script white and black smoke for us?

Beathan

Sure, Beathan! I'll give you white, black....and an indeterminate shade of grey

Cindy

[cleopatraxigalia]

im not catholic but i have a great cross to keep demons away, its scripted and for sale by my friend pastor.. ill give you the LM

[cleopatraxigalia]

But seriously,
This is a package because the LRA being elected by the RA must happen in conjunction with electing the chancellor by the people, these two changes together actually put more power back into thehands of ALL the citizens directly. It gives every citizen a say so in who the chancellor is, so lets say a citizen is independent, they get their voice heard as well as those who choose to back a faction. So the chancellor has their mandate from not a faction but "the people"... and this balance is what we need in CDS.

this bill was written by MT but it comes from collaboration with SP and DPU. of course a faction that has banked on this unabashed power for a few terms is against it.............but, keep in mind its very feasible that nucare itself gets the LRA "mandate" soon.. we, infact, do not want that... we will do it if we are called to , but we believe the power is best residing in the hands of people as a whole.. this will balance the faction vs. citizen power and spread it out nicely.

think about it, if lets say next election nucare gets one point higher than the next lowest faction.............we get three seats and LRA, possibly, ... then we can stifle anything we want, demand you all wear togas.. yadda yadda.........keep bills off the floor..........thats too much power for any one faction, and it is awarded not just for a huge percentage win, but for a one vote win as well...........................its nto in cds's best interest........I am about balance of power, and I think this does the job in ways that benefit our community...greatly.

If the RA doesnt run effectively and efficiently then not much gets done for CDS, and having the person best equipped and respected for this task is the most certain way for that to happen.

[Justice Soothsayer]

Love the togas as dress code, especially for CN. [end /sarcasm]

I don't see that the two ideas of RA's election of the LRA (in some respects taking it away from the people and giving it to the peoples' representatives) and direct election of the Chancellor (taking it away from the peoples' representatives and giving it directly to the people) need be necessarily linked, unless this is just a case of logrolling to gain votes for each separate proposal that cannot get enough votes on its own.

Our brief history with the Chancellor's office would indicate that factionalism has not had much of an impact in the selection process. Indeed, I believe each of the Chancellors have been selected with support of factions other than their own, and in some cases Chancellor candidates did not get the votes of RA members of their own faction. I worry that the direct election of the Chancellor would, in fact, lead to MORE domination of the government by the dominant faction (not to mention leading down a slippery slope towards a US-style presidency). Consider, for instance, 3 factions running for a 7-memeber RA, with the breakdown of seats at 3-2-2. The faction with 3 would probably also gain the Chancellor's office, and could end up running both the RA and the executive branch. Selection of both the Chancellor and the LRA by a vote of the representatives, however, would be much more likely to lead to a compromise where the minority faction(s) gain(s) more influence in the government.

The RA should carefully consider both proposals, but should consider them separately.

[Cindy Ecksol]

I don't see that the two ideas of RA's election of the LRA (in some respects taking it away from the people and giving it to the peoples' representatives) and direct election of the Chancellor (taking it away from the peoples' representatives and giving it directly to the people) need be necessarily linked, unless this is just a case of logrolling to gain votes for each separate proposal that cannot get enough votes on its own.

I agree: it makes more sense for these two propositions to be separated. But I believe they ARE somewhat related (see below).

I worry that the direct election of the Chancellor would, in fact, lead to MORE domination of the government by the dominant faction (not to mention leading down a slippery slope towards a US-style presidency). Consider, for instance, 3 factions running for a 7-memeber RA, with the breakdown of seats at 3-2-2. The faction with 3 would probably also gain the Chancellor's office, and could end up running both the RA and the executive branch. Selection of both the Chancellor and the LRA by a vote of the representatives, however, would be much more likely to lead to a compromise where the minority faction(s) gain(s) more influence in the government.

This is a very interesting observation, especially the thought that the changes MT proposed would lead to a more "US presidential-type" system. I personally believe that we should have one "directly elected" official and one official chosen by the RA. As Justice points out, we actually DO have that right now: the LRA is essentially tapped by the direct vote of the people while the Chancellor is chosen by the RA members. The problem I see in our current system is that this is perfectly backwards. The LRA needs to be the individual who RA members all agree is the best suited among them to be their leader. He/she is one of them and needs to be "confirmed" by them directly rather than foisted upon them by voters who will not have to work with him/her so closely. Conversely, the Chancellor should not be beholden to the RA at all: he/she needs to be an independent voice for the citizens, balancing the voice of the RA while working with them.

Observing our last Chancellorship contest, I can only say that I've rarely seen more crazy machinations to ensure that this that or the other candidate was/was not tapped as Chancellor, and it's still not clear to me that the result was a Chancellor who actually expressed the REAL preferences of the RA. Alex has certainly demonstrated his independence, but that has been despite considerable angst expressed in these forums about the balance of power in the government having been given to a faction that did not have a "mandate" from the citizens. Why not make the Chancellor the direct representative of the people (which is NOT, by the way, how it works in the US presidential system despite impressions to the contrary) and let the LRA provide leadership among his/her peers as one selected by them to lead? It's possible that the RA would be dominated by one faction and the Chancellor would be from another, or they might be from the same faction. And of course the LRA could be from yet another faction. But it seems to me that this would be the best of all possible democratic worlds: a representative body chosen by the people, a leader chosen from among those representatives who at least a majority agrees is the best suited among them to lead, and an executive who is supported by a majority of citizens to balance out the RA.

Cindy

[cleopatraxigalia]

as to the comment that the dominant party would certainly get the chancellor in too, i really doubt that.

for one.......the chancellor election is NOT at the same time as the RA, and population changes as well as the fact that it allows the citizens to balance that power, as they often do in the usa, i think many people vote for a balance when they vote for president, if the congress is all one party often ppl will vote the other for president or vis versa

.......also dont forget that the chancellor can be a non faction candidate, and therefore its more complex than just dominant party gets chancellor.. if they are doing that well, btw, then they should i guess...............chancellor will be more "candidate " specific and take on a whole new meaning than the RA elections....

I think it puts the power back the people where it belongs.........................and im not worried about a "dominant party" controlling everything this way. the people are smarter than that.

theprincess

[Arria Perreault]

I am supporter of direct democracy, as many people know. I am not sure that a direct election of the Chancellor will give more power to people. Citizen can choose a person, someone from a faction or not. It doesn't mean that citizen can have influence on the affairs. They just can renounce to re-elect a Chancellor. This direct election of the Chancellor seems to me dangerous, if the Chancellor come from the same faction that have the majority in the RA. I know that it is not an automatic danger, but a potential one. This can give a big power to this faction for some months.
The only true way to balance the power of the RA is the referendum. In this topic, I feel guilty, because I did not yet introduced a Bill proposing it, despite the fact that some people offered me help to do it. This is still a goal for me.
There are a lot of things to tell about the Chancellor position. Before to decide how we can elect the Chancellor, it would be good to make a reflexion about the way he/she can act. In fact, the executive branch of the CDS is very weak. Being member of the Chancellor office, I see that every day. A RA approval is requested for many things. I consider that the RA should make policies and the Chancellor office should implemente these policies. For example, a budget must be approved by the RA, but not every expense.
As I have already pointed here, the CDS RA is more executive than legislative. The RA acts through bills, instead to construct a legislative and political environment which gives to the executive branch a good base to work every day to make CDS a wonderful place.

[Claude Desmoulins]

A comment on the proposal to internally elect the LRA.

If you do this, you create a situation where there is almost no incentive to "win" the election. I suppose our system is so geared to coalition and compromise that lrtting the RA pick its own leader is in line witth that. However, does it create a circumstance where no one represents everybody?

You resident devil's advocate.

[Jamie Palisades]

Now that the election's over :) I'm not sure I agree with Claude's point above.

I do not feel as strongly as some about direct election of the Chancellor. But surely that *would* mean someone represents *everyone*. Apparently about half our CDS citizens are un-factioned. So direct election might be a more inclusive choice than leaving Chancellor selection to the vector sums of faction politics. :)

As for RA election of the LRA, which I do feel strongly is attractive, I think it would help the LRA lead the RA. Perhaps, if they think the LRA is doing a lousy job, they could elect a new one. That'd be an incentive for the LRA to maintain reasonably fair amd civil relations -- at least with those factions that represent a majority of the RA. Wouldn't that be a *good* thing?

Regards Jamie P

[cleopatraxigalia]

Well, Jamie, I am not sure I even "get" Claude's post. But i think it does illucidate a few things....well, by this

If you do this, you create a situation where there is almost no incentive to "win" the election.

Do you mean that unless you control things completely you do not win? wow that's news to me............

I suppose our system is so geared to coalition and compromise that lrtting the RA pick its own leader is in line witth that.

is this a bad thing?

However, does it create a circumstance where no one represents everybody?
maybe it means that everyone represents someone

Also, as MT said and I reiterated in the RA meeting. As it stands ..........a person who is not in a faction at all can run for chancellor but then only faction members can be in the body that elects the chancellor. Something is very wrong with that situation. Along with Jamies point certainly. So, do we let only faction members run for chancellor? or maybe instead we .............now listen closely everyone.............maybe independent citizens....( those not joining a faction ) should be able to run for RA?

im not sure the answer but soemthing has to change with the way we select chancellor. The answer seems to be to let the population vote for the chancellor, and along with that we need to let the LRA power shift to the newly elected by the population chancellor.

[Claude Desmoulins]

Jamie is of course correct that if the proposal to directly elect the chancellor were approved, someone would, to use my phrase, "represent everybody". I believe Justice suggested that the two proposals be considered separately, and I was trying to do that.

Most of those advocating popular election of the Chancellor and internal election of the LRA seem to treat the two proposals as a de facto package.

.

..direct election of the Chancellor. But surely that *would* mean someone represents *everyone*

The Princess calls for Independent candidates

..maybe independent citizens....( those not joining a faction ) should be able to run for RA?

im not sure the answer but soemthing has to change with the way we select chancellor. The answer seems to be to let the population vote for the chancellor,

Both Jamie and ThePrincess acknowledge that it's important to have a position popularly elected and prefer that that position be the chancellor. However, if you view the election of the chancellor by the people as solving a problem of no popular election in the system caused by making the LRA election internal to the RA, then you need to link the proposals. Otherwise you could have internal election of the LRA succeed and popular election of the chancellor fail and be left with no office in the system with a popular mandate.

The Princess asks me...

Do you mean that unless you control things completely you do not win? wow that's news to me............

That's not what I mean. Anyone who's been LRA knows that controlling things completely doesn't come with the territory. My point was that our system as it is doesn't reward much the faction that comes in first in the election, All they 'get' is the LRA, whose only real power is to set the order of the agenda at RA meetings.

She then says......

...we need to let the LRA power shift to the newly elected by the population chancellor

The constitution is pretty silent on LRA powers, so I refer us to the RA meeting procedures, which specify the following powers for the LRA.

1. The Leader of the RA (LRA) will determine the agenda for each meeting, and publish it on a notecard before each meeting. It is expected that all members will suggest agenda items, but the LRA will make the final determination. If the membership feels that the LRA has not brought an agenda item to the meeting that they want, a petition agreed to by a majority of all members can insert an agenda item into the list for the next meeting. The LRA at all times determines the order of the agenda.

2. The LRA is the chairperson of the proceedings. She/he initiates the topic, and finishes it when she/he decides that discussion is sufficient. A two-thirds majority can override the action of the LRA to finish that discussion topic. At the point of finishing that topic for that meeting, there may be up to 3 polls taken:

3. The LRA can create (or propose for creation) committees of members for the purpose of study and information gathering on proposed topics (bills, agenda items of all sorts). Committees will be formed of volunteers, and the LRA will make efforts to ensure that committees contain a balanced range of faction members and positions.

Is ThePrincess proposing that the Chancellor set RA meeting agendas?

If ,as I believe the Princess proposes, one allows independent RA candidates, is the lower limit on faction size meaningless? I and others have criticized allowing independent RA candidates as a first big step away from issue driven politics and towards a politic of personality. Now, you must have a platform to run for the RA, abd citizens vote first and foremost on that platform. Some of us believe that to be a good thing.

I believe I and Beathan? have at various times proposed a via media of having some seats elected via the current system and some in constituencies allowing independent candidates, I believe Germany does this.