D. N. Vercáriâ
Group: citizens
(4498 posts total)
(last post: March 15, 2008 - 16:51)
Citizen #26:
Dieter N Vercáriâ | > > > I am leaning towards supporting the Senate because I agree long-serving Talossans should have a respected place in the Constitution
> >
> > If that were the purpose of a senate, I would consider changing my position. But as long as it is a second layer for representing people based on where they live, I think it is entirely unnecessary.
> > --
>
>
> My goal for the Senate is exactly for that : a chamber "reserved" for the "elders".
>
> We decided to double the goal into representing the Provinces ( because you can't just have a chamber of elders ), but the real goal for me, is to have people who have seen the history of the country, and understand it throughly to have a say, while allowing "newbies" with fresh ideas to have seats in the chamber of Deputies.
>
> I would rather sit in the Senate, and let newcomers with new exciting ideas in the House of Deputies. This is why I insist on a 2 years terms : to have stability and a long-term vision.
>
> But we need a method of election for the Senate, so I think that representing the provinces might fit.
>
> If you have another idea, I am game !
This Senate of elders (sic!) brings in an element of aristocracy (or gerontocracy, in terms of time spent as a Talossan), doesn't it? Reminds me of the House of Lords (?) in Britain.
Presently I don't have an opinion regarding the Senate as representing the provinces. I hope that later this day or tomorrow I shall get around to re-read what the draft constitution has to say about the Senate and provinces and the federation. I suppose that the legal clockwork of these elements should be described in the constitution... well. I'll be back as soon as I've done reading the draft to find out.
- D. N. Vercáriâ |
