Opinion: Is anybody alive in there?
- Thread starter HEM
- Start date
I don't know for sure, because I don't know most of the Senators that well, but I think the problem may be that most issues requiring legislation are already legislated. HEM, you argue that the Senate should be more active because it's the legislature of the region. But should the legislature of the region be legislating simply for the sake of activity, essentially making up reasons to legislate because most of the important issues are covered?
One thing the Senate could look at is reviewing legislation to find potential flaws and inconsistencies. The Law Review when I was previously a citizen here in 2012 seemed to provide a decent degree of activity for the Senate at that time, and I think it's a mistake to assume all legislation is already as good as it could be. Just as an example, I think the Awards and Honours Act (2012) could use some clean-up.
I think the activity problem the Senate is facing is probably the problem that has been identified for broader regional activity: the need for a new direction that provides new activity. I think once the GAP gets fully underway, the Senate is likely to find new issues to legislate. But if Europeia is only doing the same things it has done for years, things the Senate has already legislated, obviously there isn't going to be anything for the Senate to legislate because everything is already covered. I don't think that's an institutional problem of the Senate, I think it's a broader regional activity problem.
One thing the Senate could look at is reviewing legislation to find potential flaws and inconsistencies. The Law Review when I was previously a citizen here in 2012 seemed to provide a decent degree of activity for the Senate at that time, and I think it's a mistake to assume all legislation is already as good as it could be. Just as an example, I think the Awards and Honours Act (2012) could use some clean-up.
I think the activity problem the Senate is facing is probably the problem that has been identified for broader regional activity: the need for a new direction that provides new activity. I think once the GAP gets fully underway, the Senate is likely to find new issues to legislate. But if Europeia is only doing the same things it has done for years, things the Senate has already legislated, obviously there isn't going to be anything for the Senate to legislate because everything is already covered. I don't think that's an institutional problem of the Senate, I think it's a broader regional activity problem.
Lethen
Nissan: commendable cars for Commended players
Forum Administrator
Supreme Chancellor
Honoured Citizen
Citizen
- Pronouns
- He/Him
My stance will never change on this, especially after an illuminating discussion I had with R3n on the subject months - maybe even a year - in the past. Every region that has been around long enough hits a proverbial brick wall where they run out of things to legislate; there are so many solutions that are implemented, but those all are only short-term solutions and dry up eventually as well.
I definitely recall cases in the past where the CC was nearly abolished for chronic inactivity. Perhaps we let the pendulum swing too far? Deliberately saturating the CC/CA in activity is bound to lessen the activity of the Senate, given the fairly similar areas they cover.Rach said:Idk, you use the example of the CA HEM, and the CA and CC previously have had periods of inactivity. Long ones in fact, so I think that this sort of thing tends to be cyclical. Although looking at the lists of Senators, I can see the problem. It's obviously Lethen.h43r:
I disagree with that. While the Senate can certainly take up some of the pre-legislation that we're working on - and, in fact, I've offered up some of that pre-legislation as we have more than a couple of things on-going right now - I don't know that that statement really holds true. Plus, if/when we do pass said pre-legislation, that would give the Senate something to discuss and, hopefully, eventually pass or at least seriously consider.Anumia said:
What I mean is, when we last had a dearth of activity in the CC, there was a rush of older, experienced people to go there and manage things and then we saw a preference for starting more legislation in the CC...this ultimately leads to less in the Senate, because if a pre-Act passes the CC/CA it still takes longer to get there (not saying that's a bad thing, just a -thing-), and if it doesn't pass the CC/CA it gives activity there nonetheless but none of it reaches the Senate.Mousebumples said:
Skizzy Grey
New member
A few years ago (probably sometime in 2011), the Senate evolved from a major power center to a proving ground for emerging leaders. I agree with HEM that the high quality of our existing laws are the main cause of this. I just don't happen to think it's a problem. The Senate's role remains important, but the issues it faces are no longer the most important ones facing the region.
If we were going to undertake radical reform, dividing the executive into domestic and foreign spheres (similar to the Reich Chancellor and Reich Elector in TNI) is worth discussing. I'm not sure I would support that, but at least it addresses a real problem -- that the presidency has become too big a job for one person, assuming that said person has a life outside NationStates.
Skizzy Grey
New member
I realize the circumstances are different in TNI. Also, they have a bicameral legislature, and the Kaiserin has considerably more power there than the Supreme Chancellors do here, so the split executive is hardly the only salient difference between the two systems.Anumia said:
I could see a split executive working here along the following lines:
President I
- appoints ministers in charge of recruitment, welcoming, cultural, and judicial policies
- signs or vetoes Senate legislation
- appoints High Court justices
President II
- appoints ministers in charge of foreign, military and intelligence policies
- signs treaties
Senate
- same powers as existing system, including VoNC over both Presidents.
Obviously, we wouldn't call them "President I" and "President II" -- we would need to come up with appropriate titles that conveyed the internal/external division of responsibilities without appearing to make one role subordinate to the other.
To be honest, I have always believed our centralised executive is a major boon to our region. It also means that particular Presidents can define their executive how they wish: in my case, we do see Malashaan take a greater role on interior while I take a greater role on foreign affairs, but others may be different.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Shucks. Every time I voted for a constitution or constitutional amendment regarding the Chancellory I was hoping there was more to it then that. Guess I should have just pushed for striking the language all together.HEM said: