Wittenberg

Azul all, I am seeking public feedback regarding the text to put on the ballot for referenda.

In previous elections since at least 2014 (when the old Database with secret, electronic voting was introduced), the ballot has included the full text for every amendment submitted to the electorate. However, there's no Organic or statutory mandate for doing so, and I have a few objections to raise against continuing this practice.

• Amendments can get very long and verbose, especially where they contain long sections with the full extant text to be amended, rather than employing bolded text for additions and strikethrough for deletions (a technique that was already in use in 1998 (https://web.archive.org/web/20000618132927/http://www.bahnhof.se/~anglemar/clark/1e98.html), soon after the Organic Law was adopted, and which I personally favour for the bills I write);
• Another way amendments get longer is when lots of connected provisions have to be amended to reflect the main change, even if those secondary provisions are entirely derivative and don't really add much to the substance of the amendment by themselves (e.g. the Democracy Act and Amendment's ironclad lists are described in Article IV, but then lots of other provisions, e.g. those determining what happens when a MC strikes out or is expelled, have to be adjusted to account for that change);
• Equally, there may be many amendments on the ballot; this election has 5, a number only matched by the 50th, 51st and 55th Cosă elections, and only surpassed by the (frankly ridiculous) 12 in the 48th Cosă election.

In addition, I am not aware of any nations requiring ballots to contain the full text of a constitutional amendment. I don't think anyone suggesting such a move would be taken very seriously; voters would hardly have time to read the amendment inside the voting booth, and states would hardly manage to squeeze the text into a probably oversized ballot. The expectation is usually that voters will do their own research beforehand, or that parties will campaign for one or the other outcome, which will also serve to inform voters.

We don't really have those macronational problems in the strictest sense, because almost everyone votes electronically, and even snail mail votes are cast from the comfort of one's house. I would still strongly argue that the time and size issues apply to us, though. The average voter is not going to read the full text of the amendment, but they may take the time to read an abridged description; a long and time consuming ballot is, to me, just a source of attrition. Talossan democracy is not well served by a ballot that takes so long to scroll through to lead to undervoting or blind Üc votes; not to mention provinces, which are unlucky enough to find themselves stuck to the bottom of the ballot, potentially underneath a wall of text for multiple referenda.

In my mind, the options here are three:

• Continue displaying the full text of the amendment up for ratification on the ballot;
• Displaying nothing in particular except for a link to the full text of the amendment;
• Displaying a concise description or list of changes, in addition to a further link to the full text of the amendment.

My preferred option is, of course, option 3. It strikes the balance between ballot length and requiring voters to do extra work, and if paired with the existing provisions enabling preexisting parties to submit statements, should be the best option to properly yet concisely inform those voters who don't really do much research beyond reading what's presented to them on the ballot. For these reasons, unless there's any strong objections, this is what the Chancery will implement in this and in future elections.

As such, I have already gone on to writing those concise explanations, trying to be as objective as possible, and I'm now submitting them for public review and feedback. I gladly welcome any and all, especially those from registered parties and the authors of the amendments, and plan to accommodate them as much as practical. The provisional descriptions are as follows:

RZ07	Vote to ratify 62RZ07, "Executive Power Reform Act and Amendment", providing for Prime Dictates (decrees with the force of law issued by the Seneschal and countersigned by the King) to expire after three months, unless the Ziu votes to affirm them before expiration, or unless they are ephemeral or are issued to provide for emergency spending.
RZ14	Vote to ratify 62RZ14, "Broosking Swing Mitigation Amendment (Reconsideration)", providing for the maximum number of seats that can be assigned to new citizens between general elections to be lowered from 7.5% to 4.5% of the seats apportioned between parties, rounded down to a whole number of seats. With the current 200 seat Cosă, this results in a maximum of 9 extra seats, rather than 15, to be available to new citizens. With the 20 seat Cosă that resulted from passage of 62RZ11, the "Pseudo-Real Cosă Act", and that will enter into effect (unless repealed) from the first general election after February 2027, this would result in no seats being available to new citizens, rather than 1.
RZ15	Vote to ratify 62RZ15, "Cunstavál Reform Amendment", repealing three provisions regarding Cunstaváis (the King's representatives in each province): Repeals the ability of Cunstaváis to serve as "military governors" in provinces without a constitution; Repeals a provision prohibiting the King or a Cunstavál to proclaim any provincial constitution, and provinces to pass any constitutional amendments, which conflict with provisions in the Organic Law or any other national law; Repeals a provision prohibiting the King or a Cunstavál to proclaim any provincial constitution that hasn't been approved in a referendum by a majority of all citizens, or failing that, by two-thirds of votes cast. The second provision was considered redundant with the existing Article IX Section 5, and the repeal of the third provision leaves provincial constitutions to self-regulate how they would be amended.
RZ26	Vote to ratify 62RZ26, "Democracy Act and Amendment", providing for the following: The lowering of the number of seats in the Cosă from 200 to 20, already established in statutory law by 62RZ11 - the "Pseudo-Real Cosă Act", is enshrined in the Organic Law. The change would only take effect from the first general election after February 2027, one year after the passage of 62RZ11. The seats won by each party, as well as any vacant seats occurring between elections, are (re)assigned to candidates automatically following the order they appear on the ballot, instead of the party leader freely apportioning seats won by the party between candidates. Seats that cannot be (re)assigned, typically due to each valid candidate already holding the maximum number of seats, would be (re)assigned by the King under His best judgement, or left vacant. The share of the Cosă's seats that can be held by a single member is raised from 2 seats to 3 in the future 20-seat Cosă, and from 20 seats to 31 in the current 200-seat Cosă (still valid for this election). The calculation assumes that the number of votes cast for valid political parties is the same as in the previous election (94); the formula means the individual limit is raised with fewer votes, and lowered with more votes. Any person placed on a party's list of candidates to the Cosă will have to confirm their willingness to stand for election, rather than this willingness being implicit, as is currently the case. A provision to allow the assignment of a limited number of extra seats in the Cosă to new citizens between general elections is repealed, if and only if the concurring amendment that provides for these seats to be reduced in number (C2 - Referendum on 62RZ14) fails. A provision to impeach and a remove a member of the Cosă by a two-third majority and approval by the King, which already exists, is clarified. Political parties's internal processes for nominating candidates for the Cosă will have to allow and reflect the democratic input of its members, with the latter being able to file suit if this is not the case.
RZ27	Vote to ratify 62RZ27, the "We Have a New-ish King Amendment", providing for the name of former King John to be replaced by that of King Txec in Organic Law Article II Section 3, where the name of the reigning King is mentioned.

Each of the descriptions is further followed by a link to the amendment (example (https://database.talossa.com/elections/august-2026-elections/item/261)).