Here are two linked bills.  I would like to reiterate that I still think we need oversight on the balloting process -- if it's the most recent Electoral Commission, that'd be fine too.


Whereas, the monarchy is a central pillar of the country and its survival depends on its planned future as well as its activity, and

Whereas, this allows for democratic confirmations without becoming wholesale elections,

THEREFORE, the Ziu directs that Article II of the Organic Law, which currently read:

QuoteSection 1
The Kingdom of Talossa is a constitutional Monarchy with a King (or, if female, Queen) as its head of State.

Section 2
The King is the symbolic head of the nation. The nation democratically grants the King certain Royal Powers and duties as described in this Organic Law and in statute law. The Ziu may establish procedures for when the King fails to perform a duty.

Section 3
The King of Talossa is King John I, until his demise, abdication, or removal from the throne. Should the King at any time renounce or lose his citizenship, that renunciation or loss shall be deemed to imply his abdication of the Throne. Upon the demise, abdication, or removal from the Throne of the King, the Uppermost Cort shall be a Council of Regency.

Section 4
In dire circumstances, when the King is judged by competent medical authority to be incapable of executing his duties, or if he is convicted by the Talossan Uppermost Cort of violation of this Organic Law, treason, bribery, nonfeasance endangering the safety, order or good government of the Kingdom, or other high crimes, the nation may remove the King from the Throne. The Cosa shall pronounce by a two-thirds vote, with the approval of the Senäts, that the King is to be removed, and this pronouncement shall immediately be transmitted to the people for their verdict in a referendum. If a two-thirds majority of the people concur, the King is removed.

Section 5
The King may, at whim, appoint, replace, or remove a Regent (or a Council of Regency, which is considered equivalent to a Regent), who shall administer the government in the name of the King, and exercise all powers Organically or legally vested in the King, except the power to appoint or replace a Regent. No person not a citizen of Talossa shall be competent to serve as Regent or member of a Council of Regency. The Ziu may by law remove or replace any appointed Regent, and if the Ziu removes a Regent appointed by the King, the King may not reappoint the same person Regent without the prior consent of the Ziu.

Section 6
The King may grant titles of nobility and confer awards and decorations.

shall be amended to read as follows:

QuoteSection 1
The Kingdom of Talossa is a constitutional Monarchy with a King (or, if female, Queen) as its head of State.

Section 2
The King is the symbolic head of the nation. The nation democratically grants the King certain Royal Powers and duties as described in this Organic Law and in statute law. In addition, the King may grant titles of nobility and confer awards and decorations. The Ziu may establish procedures for when the King fails to perform a duty.

Section 3
The King of Talossa is King John I, until his demise, abdication, or removal from the throne.  Upon his demise, abdication, or removal from the throne, the new King shall be the Heir Presumptive, who shall be the duly-designated successor to the throne.  The new King shall likewise be succeeded in the same manner, and thus forever in perpetuity.

Section 4
Should the King at any time renounce or lose his citizenship, that renunciation or loss shall be deemed to imply his abdication of the Throne.  However, the King may abdicate without renouncing his citizenship.

Section 5
In dire circumstances, when the King is judged by competent medical authority to be incapable of executing his duties, or if he is convicted by the Talossan Uppermost Cort of violation of this Organic Law, treason, bribery, nonfeasance endangering the safety, order or good government of the Kingdom, or other high crimes, the nation may remove the King from the Throne. The Cosa shall pronounce by a two-thirds vote, with the approval of the Senäts, that the King is to be removed, and this pronouncement shall immediately be transmitted to the people for their verdict in a referendum. If a two-thirds majority of the people concur, the King is removed.

Section 6
The King may, at whim, appoint, replace, or remove a Regent (or a Council of Regency, which is considered equivalent to a Regent), who shall administer the government in the name of the King, and exercise all powers Organically or legally vested in the King, except the power to appoint or replace a Regent. No person not a citizen of Talossa shall be competent to serve as Regent or member of a Council of Regency. The Ziu may by law remove or replace any appointed Regent, and if the Ziu removes a Regent appointed by the King, the King may not reappoint the same person Regent without the prior consent of the Ziu.

Section 7
The King may nominate an Heir Presumptive by special decree to the Ziu.  This decree shall take effect upon approval of a two-thirds supermajority of the Cosa and majority approval of the Senäts, and by a majority of the people.

Section 8
Upon any vacancy on the Throne with no Heir Presumptive, the Secretary of State shall announce a convocation of succession.  This announcement will include details of the convocation of succession, as described by the Secretary of State. This announcement shall further include a list of all those who have been citizens no fewer than seven full years prior to that date, and who are therefore eligible electors of the convocation.  The Secretary of State shall shall immediately thereafter notify all of these electors of the convocation and their responsibilities. The Secretary of State shall also include in this announcement a set of proposed rules and procedures for the convocation of succession, for public debate and consideration. The convocation of succession's first order of business shall be to approve, with or without modifications, the rules under which it will operate, which may differ from the Secretary of State's proposals, but may not contradict this Organic Law.

Fourteen days after this announcement, the convocation shall be deemed to have commenced.  It shall be chaired by the Secretary of State in a fair manner designed to foster open discussion and faithful service, unless a different chair is elected by the convocation of succession by the expressed preference of an absolute majority of members, or by the expressed preference of a plurality of members within a period of seven days. The convocation shall vote by secret ballot on a King.  All electors' votes shall have equal weight, and whichever candidate first receives the support of two-thirds of the convocation shall be deemed the nominee of the convocation of succession.  No votes for ineligible candidates shall be considered. This choice shall be submitted to the people by referendum for their approval.  Should a majority of the people approve of the nominee, they shall be King of the Kingdom of Talossa.

Section 9
For the duration of any time during which the throne is empty, the Uppermost Cort shall be a Council of Regency.

This bill shall only come into effect (a) upon the full passage and approval of the Decree Amendment of 2024/XLV or (b) upon the death, abdication, or removal of His Majesty King John I.




Whereas it is universally acknowledged that it is time for gratitude and progress forward,

THEREFORE the Ziu decrees, effective thirty days from the ratification of this amendment by the people, that the throne is vacant as though King John I had abdicated, and King John I is once more an ordinary citizen, with all of the rights and privileges of the same, released from his office and his duties with the nation's gratitude for his long service.  The Secretary of State is directed to begin immediate preparations for a convocation of succession.

This bill shall only come into effect upon the full passage and approval of the Succession Amendment of 2024/XLV; it shall be considered chronologically to have come into effect immediately after the Succession Amendment of 2024/XLV, rather than simultaneously.  This bill shall not come into effect if His Majesty King John I has died, abdicated, or been removed from the throne.

MATHPOSTING
----------------------------------------------------------

Like I said above, initially I had not done any math while making these maps, but my curiosity got the better of me and I decided to see how they shake out in terms of "numerical fairness". I looked at a few criteria: the difference in each province's population (as of the 2020 US Census) from the average provincial population, and the "relative average difference" of each province (the province's difference from the average expressed as a fraction of that average).

For comparison's sake I've also done the math on the current catchment areas. Note that the absence of an assignment for Maine means the current average provincial population is lower than either proposed realignment.

The second table highlights the lowest value in its row in green (or in the case of the "Minimum" rows, the highest value). It's clear from this comparison that the latter realignment map not only generates borders that are fairly clean from an aesthetic standpoint, it also generates provinces that are much more tightly-grouped in terms of population than the current set.

These maps rearrange the catchment areas within the US states, with the obvious exception of Wisconsin itself.

The idea is to divide the states as evenly as possible among each of the eight provinces with respect to number of states -- not population thereof. I have done some bare-bones math on that (see the second post) if people want to see how it shakes out, but population itself is not the goal. Since there are 49 states plus DC to divide out, that's still 50, which divided by eight is six with a remainder of two. In other words, two provinces will each receive seven states, with the others each receiving six. Where possible, I have attempted to consider both geographical and cultural reasons for putting each catchment area where it is. That being said, since the only real "provincial cultures" are the Cjovanì and the Reviensadeirs -- and the latter aren't really geography-centric -- a lot of the "cultural" considerations are of an extra-Talossan nature.

• Cézembre, which currently has no states, receives the six New England states, due in part both to their proximity to Quebec (the main francophone region of North America) and also because they are the closest states to the island of Cézembre itself.
• Atatürk, which currently contains five of the six New England states (Maine being unassigned), is instead reassigned to the area around (and including) the District of Columbia. Atatürk contains Talossa's capital, so it made sense to me to have it contain our Big Neighbor's capital as well. (Having grown up in Virginia, I am aware Kentucky is not super close to DC, but it works out here that the borders are rather clean if we make it the sixth state in KA.)
• Maritiimi-Maxhestic receives no new states, but is reduced to the Southeast.
• Benito, which currently only has the Cjovanì homeland of Ohio, receives several states with higher Italian ancestry (which are luckily contiguous with Ohio itself). Alternatively, if the Belacostă name is approved, BE would have a large amount of beautiful coast along the Great Lakes.
• Fiovă, which currently has no states, receives six states that lie along the Mississippi River (as fiovă means river).
• Vuode loses most of its current territory to Benito and Fiovă, but keeps the recently-transferred Minnesota and gains several other "heartland" states (which feels appropriate to a province named for a bed. Beds, heartlands...coziness and safety seem to permeate the idea.)
• Maricopa, having lost Arkansas and Louisiana to Fiovă, gains Hawaii and Nevada from Florencia.
• Along with M-M, Florencia is the other province to only lose territory without making gains, but because of this they are also one of the two provinces to receive an extra state.

Furthermore, the catchment assignments of US territories (Puerto Rico, Guam, etc.) are unaffected by these changes, in part because their current provinces (M-M and FL) are losing territory as opposed to gaining.

Please keep in mind a few things:

• This only affects new citizens; any current citizens keep their provincial assignments unless they request to be moved to their new province as per Org.IX.8 and Lex.E.7.3.3. Furthermore, under Lex.E.7.3.1, it would appear that any citizens who do not request to be reassigned immediately retain the right to do so at any point in the future.
• This map provides a springboard for us to reconsider the alignment of Canadian provinces, Mexican states, and Wisconsin counties (I have a few maps on this last idea which I can post later).
• This map is only a preliminary draft; a conversation-starter, if you will.

The third map attachment is one that rewards M-M a seventh state instead of Maricopa, since M-M is the other territory to only lose states (Florencia and M-M surrender territory, so it seems fair they get the extra states). This one definitely creates some clean borders, especially out west. It also seemed fair that since Vuode was losing both New York and Illinois (home to the largest and third-largest cities in the country, respectively), they get the heavily-populated Texas as compensation (Maricopa is keeping the most populous state, it seems odd they should get the second-most as well.)

Some things these maps were not explicitly designed with in mind were mergers. In some cases, (for example, a VD/M-M merger, or FL/MA) they work quite well, and in other cases (BE with anyone)...less so.

As this prospective did not respond to the request for her to take the Oath of Citizenship within the allowable time, this petition will no longer be considered and the prospective immigrant will not be granted citizenship. Should she wish to become a citizen, she will need to undergo the full immigration process.




Secretár d'Estat/Secretary of State

It is my pleasure to open call for bills of the May 2024 Clark.

Eventually, the clark can be viewed in real time here:

www.talossa.ca/files/cosa_vote_result.php?cosa=59&clark=6 (for the votes)

and here:

www.talossa.ca/files/clark.php?cosa=59&clark=6 (for the bills )

It is NOT too late to submit bills, of course, as you have OFFICIALLY until the morning of the 30th of this month, provided your bills have been in the Hopper before end of business day the 15th, of course. I will make the Clark on May 1st's morning and bills submitted up to a few hours before that will probably also be taken.

PLEASE note that in order to support a bill, you need to:

1 ) Be a Senator, the Secretary of State or the King
or
2 ) Have been nominated as a Cosa Member for the upcoming Clark BEFORE the 15th,

To vote on the Clark, you will once again have 2 options:

1 ) You will be able to vote in the Clark thread (which will be created later on the 1st of May), as usual. I will enter your votes in the DB.

2 ) You will be able to vote directly in the database, using your usernumber and DB password (which you can retrieve at: www.talossa.ca/files/login.php using the PSC of the election) or by login via Facebook (which retrieve manual activation on my part).




Secretár d'Estat/Secretary of State

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on April 11, 2024, 07:35:45 PMHappy to consider other suggestions for the Regency btw, but this is the existing procedure (with a tweak or two) as stipulated in OrgLaw II.5. We could even have a "sunset clause" to make sure we do actually choose a King in a decent time frame.

I have no issue with either this or the Active Monarchy Assurance Amendment going through, but if they both got Clarked and both passed, we'd be in trouble :D I just have a feeling that this has a better chance.

this is an excellent addition on the sunset clause BTW..

Okay keep me posted and if I can make it I will play...I should be easy to take out LOL

With four Senators casting a vote, this bill passes the Senate by a vote of 3-1.

As the bill has passed both houses of the Chancellery, it now goes to the King or Vicere for approval or veto. If neither takes any action on the bill by Calondă Mai, it will become law and the Maestro shall begin preparations for the referendum.

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Yesterday at 05:49:26 PM

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on Yesterday at 04:23:46 PM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Yesterday at 10:48:00 AMMaybe the solution is just to do a separate bill?  That would be easiest, and I think trust would extend that far at this point.  If they were viewed as a joint package, I'd support that (not that I have a vote, but I am pretty noisy).

Can we do a separate bill as a joint package, i.e. the two go up or go down together? I would be worried that one would get vetoed but the other passed.

I really really really doubt you need to worry about a veto. And yes the provisions can be easily written so that they are contingent on each other. That is a good solution. That wouldn't go in the text, but in the therefore clauses. I can do it tonight if you'd like.

Yeah good, I liked the wording in my Abdication Bill. If there really is no chance of a veto, this is the dignified way out.

Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN on Yesterday at 04:23:46 PM

Quote from: Baron Alexandreu Davinescu on Yesterday at 10:48:00 AMMaybe the solution is just to do a separate bill?  That would be easiest, and I think trust would extend that far at this point.  If they were viewed as a joint package, I'd support that (not that I have a vote, but I am pretty noisy).

Can we do a separate bill as a joint package, i.e. the two go up or go down together? I would be worried that one would get vetoed but the other passed.

I really really really doubt you need to worry about a veto. And yes the provisions can be easily written so that they are contingent on each other. That is a good solution. That wouldn't go in the text, but in the therefore clauses. I can do it tonight if you'd like.