McEntire
Well-known member
- Pronouns
- she/her
Monkey's Musings Poll: Region Satisfied with Senate, Significant Minority Seeks Bigger Say in Exec
Analysis and Commentary by Sh*t-Stirrer-in-Chief, McEntire
In the wake of Senator Monkey's (now dead-on-arrival) proposal to split the terms of Senators so that some were 70 days and some were 35 days, we decided to do a poll on Senate changes. 30 people responded, pretty well distributed on how long they've been in the region. 80% who took this poll have been Senators before. 96.7% said they always vote in Senate elections, which means only one respondent was honest - get real, we've all missed one or two. I'm not making graphs for the results of any of these questions! They're boring!Analysis and Commentary by Sh*t-Stirrer-in-Chief, McEntire
These two questions show that a decent (but not unshakeable) majority think that the current level of Senate power is enough. 30% of people think that the Senate should be more powerful, which is a decent base to build off of for any of you reform-minded folks out there.
Approximately 10% of people chose to make me regret giving "Other" as an option, and decided to give more ~nuanced~ takes. Here's my take: nuance is overrated. Don't like it? Do your own poll!
Similar story here, most people are satisfied with the Senate's involvement in Executive policy. BUT (and it's a decent-sized but), some of these questions of involvement are close to even. Although a majority are fine with the current level of involvement, a decent number of people want more involvement in three areas (the top losers in the loser pile, if you will): Foreign Affairs, Interior, and Justice.
People probably voted for Justice out of a sense of "legal this, legal that, yeah they should probably be involved," but a comment from the comment box gives some insight on why people want the Senate involved in FA and Interior:
About 37% of people want the Senate to be more involved in Foreign Affairs. So that's interesting, at least. Bear it in mind as you're writing your Senate platform next time.The areas that ensure the continued function of the region, FA and Interior are the most important ministries and there is a mandate to make sure they are running smoothly for the good of the region.
You can check out the rest of people's comments below:
The areas that ensure the continued function of the region, FA and Interior are the most important ministries and there is a mandate to make sure they are running smoothly for the good of the region.
For me, it all depends on the way the proposal may be executed.
seems like a dumbing down of the senate
Ideally the discussion will at least provide a jumping-off point for other ideas besides staggered seats
LEGISLATIVE SPLIT LEGISLATIVE SPLIT LEGISLATIVE SPLIT
I would support shorter overall term lengths, not staggered terms.
I guess my support of the CA might shift depending on if the short term idea is implemented.
the senate is boring
For me, it all depends on the way the proposal may be executed.
seems like a dumbing down of the senate
Ideally the discussion will at least provide a jumping-off point for other ideas besides staggered seats
LEGISLATIVE SPLIT LEGISLATIVE SPLIT LEGISLATIVE SPLIT
I would support shorter overall term lengths, not staggered terms.
I guess my support of the CA might shift depending on if the short term idea is implemented.
the senate is boring
One of the comments from the people who couldn't be bothered to answer the simple, multiple choice question was interesting too. They said "It is not the job of the Senate to set executive policy and it never should be." And I thought, is it? That's an interesting question. What do y'all think?
***
Commentary: Europeia says, checks and balances? I don't know her!
The above question, "is it the job of the Senate to set executive policy, and should it be?" really made me think. Yes, the Senate confirms Ministers, but do they ever really turn anyone down over policy disagreements? Well, besides me, apparently (I think I'm the only person to have two failed confirmations - real badge of pride, there).
But then I thought, why not? For real, Presidents don't have to run their decisions by anybody. In real life, most of the things Presidents want to do have to run through a legislative body. That's what's called checks and balances.
In Europeia, the legislative branch deals with prettying up the laws, and the executive branch deals with doing things that people care about. And ne'er the twain shall meet.
Of course, every time that reform is proposed that would actually bring the Senate into doing things that people would care about, those opposed to it say "but we can't make the executive's life harder!" And then they clutch their pearls at even the thought and look around for the nearest fainting couch.
Well I'm old enough now to tell the hard truths, and here's one of 'em: if the Senate is ever going to be interesting, it's got to wrest some power back from the Executive. And that, necessarily, is going to make the Executive's life harder.
Now, I am fully aware that most people don't want this to happen. Which is why things probably won't change. But goodness me, we should at least have the discussion on honest terms. The Senate taking some authority from the Executive would be a whole lot of fun, and now we'll see if anyone cares enough to do anything about it. Again, probably not, because who feels like getting chided by the Executive-centric scolds of Europeia?
Certainly not me, which tells me it might be time to wrap this thing up. Until the next time, ta-ta!