|
| RE: Question: Unicameralism | D. N. Vercáriâ | January 31, 2005 - 05:51 | | la garçâ malpadert | February 01, 2005 - 02:24 |
|
Parent message | | D. N. Vercáriâ | January 31, 2005 - 05:51 |
| RE: Question: Unicameralism(#1042), posted by la garçâ malpadert, [IP Hidden], February 01, 2005 - 02:24. Viewed 416 times. |
|
la garçâ malpadert
Group: admins
(4379 posts total)
(last post: March 13, 2008 - 16:29)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercáriâ | > What about the Provinces, if we'll have an unicameral Parliament? Will it still make sense to mention the Provinces in the constitution, if the Provinces won't have a say in federal affairs, by means of their chamber of Parliament, the Senate?
I think that we could leave provinces alone - they would be like the old Penguinean "wapentakes", in this case. However, if you want them taken out of the constitution, draft an amendment. :)
Miestrâ Schivâ
"The Republic's Most Articulate Spokeswhatever" - R. B. Madison
A slave begins by demanding justice, and ends by wanting to wear a crown. |
|
| | D. N. Vercáriâ | February 02, 2005 - 14:48 |
|
Parent message | | la garçâ malpadert | February 01, 2005 - 02:24 |
| RE: Question: Unicameralism(#1053), posted by D. N. Vercáriâ, [IP Hidden], February 02, 2005 - 14:48. Viewed 398 times. |
|
D. N. Vercáriâ
Group: citizens
(4498 posts total)
(last post: March 15, 2008 - 16:51)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercáriâ | > > What about the Provinces, if we'll have an unicameral Parliament? Will it still make sense to mention the Provinces in the constitution, if the Provinces won't have a say in federal affairs, by means of their chamber of Parliament, the Senate?
>
> I think that we could leave provinces alone - they would be like the old Penguinean "wapentakes", in this case. However, if you want them taken out of the constitution, draft an amendment. :)
Well, I don't intend to abolish the idea of having provinces, and I don't want them to be powerless wishy-washy constructs like the Penguinean wapentakes. I meant to say that if the idea of having a Senate as sort of a "House of Provinces" is abolished, then probably it would be a matter of honesty to give up on provinces as well. ;-)
- D. N. Vercáriâ |
|
| | JKK | January 31, 2005 - 06:05 |
|
Parent message | | D. N. Vercáriâ | January 31, 2005 - 05:51 |
| RE: Question: Unicameralism(#1017), posted by JKK, [IP Hidden], January 31, 2005 - 06:05. Viewed 382 times. |
|
JKK
Group: citizens
(738 posts total)
(last post: August 11, 2005 - 01:39)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercáriâ | This is why my notion has always been that at X number of citizens, we constitute the Senate. However, no one has ever shown much interest in this scalable sort of legislative arrangement.
jkk
AIM: jkkandalex
E-mail: apostate at gte dot net |
|
| | President Anglatzarâ | January 31, 2005 - 06:54 |
|
Parent message | | JKK | January 31, 2005 - 06:05 |
| RE: Question: Unicameralism(#1018), posted by President Anglatzarâ, [IP Hidden], January 31, 2005 - 06:54. Viewed 394 times. |
|
President Anglatzarâ
Group: admins
(3194 posts total)
(last post: March 14, 2008 - 07:21)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercáriâ | > This is why my notion has always been that at X number of citizens, we constitute the Senate. However, no one has ever shown much interest in this scalable sort of legislative arrangement.
We could start out with one chamber, and the day our citizens' roll exceeds 100, we'll discuss the necessary amendment to constitute a Senäts.
Dieter, provinces can be used for many more things than just sending a senator to the Senäts.
--
 |
|
| | D. N. Vercáriâ | January 31, 2005 - 17:58 |
|
Parent message | | President Anglatzarâ | January 31, 2005 - 06:54 |
| RE: Question: Unicameralism(#1038), posted by D. N. Vercáriâ, [IP Hidden], January 31, 2005 - 17:58. Viewed 379 times. |
|
D. N. Vercáriâ
Group: citizens
(4498 posts total)
(last post: March 15, 2008 - 16:51)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercáriâ |
> Dieter, provinces can be used for many more things than just sending a senator to the Senäts.
Well, but by sending senators to the Senate they could have an impact on the future of the Republic. Without this feature, I'm afraid, a "province" is just a random group of people that are put together by the constitution, for no particular purpose.
- D. N. Vercáriâ |
|
| | Justice dal Navâ | January 31, 2005 - 14:00 |
|
Parent message | | President Anglatzarâ | January 31, 2005 - 06:54 |
| RE: Question: Unicameralism(#1025), posted by Justice dal Navâ, [IP Hidden], January 31, 2005 - 14:00. Viewed 343 times. |
|
Justice dal Navâ
Group: admins
(5222 posts total)
(last post: March 14, 2008 - 13:43)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercáriâ | > > This is why my notion has always been that at X number of citizens, we constitute the Senate. However, no one has ever shown much interest in this scalable sort of legislative arrangement.
Au contraire, Jeanathon. I have said this seems like the only compromise I can live with. I believe strongly in a bicameral legislature, but I can admit that the current population may not be able to sustain it. I do, however, distrust any adn all attempt to abolish the Senäts in every instance.
What good reason is there to NOT have a Senäts? The only argument against it is low population. And abolition of the Senäts sounds like a permanent solution to a temporary problem.
> We could start out with one chamber, and the day our citizens' roll exceeds 100, we'll discuss the necessary amendment to constitute a Senäts.
Um, how about 35? Even the Kingdom never had 100.
> Dieter, provinces can be used for many more things than just sending a senator to the Senäts.
Sure, but who represents them in Parlamînt?
--------------------------------------
E isc al Arendra del Bún Úr. Fáden es fóclan gleðen fer brach. El Bún Úr fólat ëtfin cún sino synt prepar. Cún þis paset, þa omin isc fólen. Es lyþ was sár. -- vól Cúliðlaþ
Chirischtôval Curt Cavéir,
Dean of the Republic of Talossa
|
|
| | President Anglatzarâ | January 31, 2005 - 14:40 |
|
Parent message | | Justice dal Navâ | January 31, 2005 - 14:00 |
| RE: Question: Unicameralism(#1027), posted by President Anglatzarâ, [IP Hidden], January 31, 2005 - 14:40. Viewed 406 times. |
|
President Anglatzarâ
Group: admins
(3194 posts total)
(last post: March 14, 2008 - 07:21)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercáriâ | > What good reason is there to NOT have a Senäts?
Er, the same reason we don't have a homeowners' society or a military junta? We don't need them.
> > We could start out with one chamber, and the day our citizens' roll exceeds 100, we'll discuss the necessary amendment to constitute a Senäts.
>
> Um, how about 35? Even the Kingdom never had 100.
The Kingdom didn't need a senate either, that is correct.
> > Dieter, provinces can be used for many more things than just sending a senator to the Senäts.
>
> Sure, but who represents them in Parlamînt?
Who represents the left handed? The teachers? The women? Why do our admittedly rather artificial provinces, of all organisatory groupings, need special representation?
--
|
|
| | Justice dal Navâ | January 31, 2005 - 14:47 |
|
Parent message | | President Anglatzarâ | January 31, 2005 - 14:40 |
| RE: Question: Unicameralism(#1028), posted by Justice dal Navâ, [IP Hidden], January 31, 2005 - 14:47. Viewed 380 times. |
|
Justice dal Navâ
Group: admins
(5222 posts total)
(last post: March 14, 2008 - 13:43)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercáriâ | > > > Dieter, provinces can be used for many more things than just sending a senator to the Senäts.
> >
> > Sure, but who represents them in Parlamînt?
>
> Who represents the left handed? The teachers? The women? Why do our admittedly rather artificial provinces, of all organisatory groupings, need special representation?
How are the provinces artificial in a way that the whole Republic isn't? Following your logic, we'd have no government at all.
--------------------------------------
E isc al Arendra del Bún Úr. Fáden es fóclan gleðen fer brach. El Bún Úr fólat ëtfin cún sino synt prepar. Cún þis paset, þa omin isc fólen. Es lyþ was sár. -- vól Cúliðlaþ
Chirischtôval Curt Cavéir,
Dean of the Republic of Talossa
|
|
| | la garçâ malpadert | January 31, 2005 - 15:04 |
|
Parent message | | Justice dal Navâ | January 31, 2005 - 14:47 |
| RE: Question: Unicameralism(#1030), posted by la garçâ malpadert, [IP Hidden], January 31, 2005 - 15:04. Viewed 422 times. |
|
la garçâ malpadert
Group: admins
(4379 posts total)
(last post: March 13, 2008 - 16:29)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercáriâ |
> How are the provinces artificial in a way that the whole Republic isn't?
Er, because we don't even know who's in them to start with? People joined the Republic - they didn't join any Province (with the possible exception of our illegal immigrant. :)
Miestrâ Schivâ
"The Republic's Most Articulate Spokeswhatever" - R. B. Madison
A slave begins by demanding justice, and ends by wanting to wear a crown. |
|
| | Justice dal Navâ | January 31, 2005 - 17:41 |
|
Parent message | | la garçâ malpadert | January 31, 2005 - 15:04 |
| RE: Question: Unicameralism(#1036), posted by Justice dal Navâ, [IP Hidden], January 31, 2005 - 17:41. Viewed 398 times. |
|
Justice dal Navâ
Group: admins
(5222 posts total)
(last post: March 14, 2008 - 13:43)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercáriâ | >
> > How are the provinces artificial in a way that the whole Republic isn't?
>
> Er, because we don't even know who's in them to start with? People joined the Republic - they didn't join any Province (with the possible exception of our illegal immigrant. :)
Not to be an asshole, but that doesn't actually address the artificiality of the provinces. The provinces were conceived of as part of the Republic from the beginning. We had intended to (and did) claim some provinces. So how can one separate the two? If the provinces are "artificial" adn therefore unfit for legislative representation, then wouldn't that apply to the Republic as a whole?
--------------------------------------
E isc al Arendra del Bún Úr. Fáden es fóclan gleðen fer brach. El Bún Úr fólat ëtfin cún sino synt prepar. Cún þis paset, þa omin isc fólen. Es lyþ was sár. -- vól Cúliðlaþ
Chirischtôval Curt Cavéir,
Dean of the Republic of Talossa
|
|
| | President Anglatzarâ | February 01, 2005 - 02:44 |
|
Parent message | | Justice dal Navâ | January 31, 2005 - 17:41 |
| RE: Question: Unicameralism(#1043), posted by President Anglatzarâ, [IP Hidden], February 01, 2005 - 02:44. Viewed 388 times. |
|
President Anglatzarâ
Group: admins
(3194 posts total)
(last post: March 14, 2008 - 07:21)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercáriâ | > >
> > > How are the provinces artificial in a way that the whole Republic isn't?
> >
> > Er, because we don't even know who's in them to start with? People joined the Republic - they didn't join any Province (with the possible exception of our illegal immigrant. :)
>
> Not to be an asshole, but that doesn't actually address the artificiality of the provinces. The provinces were conceived of as part of the Republic from the beginning. We had intended to (and did) claim some provinces. So how can one separate the two? If the provinces are "artificial" adn therefore unfit for legislative representation, then wouldn't that apply to the Republic as a whole?
First, I don't mean anything negative by "artificial", just that they don't represent any natural division, but one we have made up entirely because we think it's cool. The Republic is not artificial. The Republic consists of us Talossans, we are a bunch of people who are building a nation, Talossa. We are bound together by common aspirations, a history, and a sense of friendship. The same is not true for the provinces (except the history part, partially). The provinces, on the other hand, can be two or five or ten, we haven't decided how big they should be, who should live in them etc. They are drawing-board constructs.
Surely you see the difference.
--
|
|
| | D. N. Vercáriâ | January 31, 2005 - 17:47 |
|
Parent message | | Justice dal Navâ | January 31, 2005 - 17:41 |
| RE: Question: Unicameralism(#1037), posted by D. N. Vercáriâ, [IP Hidden], January 31, 2005 - 17:47. Viewed 390 times. |
|
D. N. Vercáriâ
Group: citizens
(4498 posts total)
(last post: March 15, 2008 - 16:51)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercáriâ | > >
> > > How are the provinces artificial in a way that the whole Republic isn't?
> >
> > Er, because we don't even know who's in them to start with? People joined the Republic - they didn't join any Province (with the possible exception of our illegal immigrant. :)
>
> Not to be an asshole, but that doesn't actually address the artificiality of the provinces. The provinces were conceived of as part of the Republic from the beginning. We had intended to (and did) claim some provinces. So how can one separate the two? If the provinces are "artificial" adn therefore unfit for legislative representation, then wouldn't that apply to the Republic as a whole?
Yes, I seem to recall that the four stars on our flag aren't meant to be advertisement for Qator Itrins, they are meant to represent four provinces that split from a certain kingdom.
- D. N. Vercáriâ |
|
| | Justice dal Navâ | January 31, 2005 - 19:24 |
|
Parent message | | D. N. Vercáriâ | January 31, 2005 - 17:47 |
| RE: Question: Unicameralism(#1040), posted by Justice dal Navâ, [IP Hidden], January 31, 2005 - 19:24. Viewed 409 times. |
|
Justice dal Navâ
Group: admins
(5222 posts total)
(last post: March 14, 2008 - 13:43)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercáriâ | > > >
> > > > How are the provinces artificial in a way that the whole Republic isn't?
> > >
> > > Er, because we don't even know who's in them to start with? People joined the Republic - they didn't join any Province (with the possible exception of our illegal immigrant. :)
> >
> > Not to be an asshole, but that doesn't actually address the artificiality of the provinces. The provinces were conceived of as part of the Republic from the beginning. We had intended to (and did) claim some provinces. So how can one separate the two? If the provinces are "artificial" adn therefore unfit for legislative representation, then wouldn't that apply to the Republic as a whole?
>
> Yes, I seem to recall that the four stars on our flag aren't meant to be advertisement for Qator Itrins, they are meant to represent four provinces that split from a certain kingdom.
Danke schön, sir, for backing me up on this. My point exactly. :-)
--------------------------------------
E isc al Arendra del Bún Úr. Fáden es fóclan gleðen fer brach. El Bún Úr fólat ëtfin cún sino synt prepar. Cún þis paset, þa omin isc fólen. Es lyþ was sár. -- vól Cúliðlaþ
Chirischtôval Curt Cavéir,
Dean of the Republic of Talossa
|
|
|
|
