The Self-Destructing Senäts Repeal Amendment

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

WHEREAS Organic Law III.7 currently reads:

Section 7 Unless a province explicitly requests that Chancery conduct the election to the Senate seat for that province, the province shall be responsible for doing so, and shall certify to the Chancery that the result represents the will of the people. (53RZ18)

AND WHEREAS this includes a ridiculous Catch-22, in that a province without a functioning Government cannot make such a request, and will thus be given the responsibility to conduct an election which by that very fact it cannot conduct;

AND WHEREAS precisely this occurred in the elections for Senator from Cézembre and Maritiimi-Maxhestic accompanying the 55th Cosa election;

AND WHEREAS I honestly can't believe whoever wrote this section didn't anticipate this problem;

BE IT ENACTED by the King, Cosa and Senäts in Ziu assembled that Organic Law III.7 be amended to read as follows:

Every province's government shall be responsible for conducting the election to the Senate seat for that province. Such a government may delegate this responsibility to the Chancery by making a request to this effect. In case of a breakdown of provincial Government so that it can neither conduct the election nor make a request to the Chancery to do so, the Chancery shall conduct the election.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

For those not aware of the situation in Maritiimi-Maxhestic: the incumbent provincial Governor equivalent ("Grand General Secretary") has gone AWOL and thus could not communicate with the Chancery or get his own provincial officials organised. The incumbent provincial Secretary of State equivalent ("Maximally Magnificent Majordomo") had actually forgotten what the job entailed, and was rudely surprised to get a letter from the Chancery telling him to get the election going.

Collapse of provincial governments render the existing OrgLaw III.7 ridiculous.

[Glüc]

This seems like a sensible idea.

Though it doesn't stop a situation like Vuode where a law was passed that seems almost designed to prevent anyone not fully up to date with provincial law from running, resulting in two unopposed elections in a way that seems wildly undemocratic to me.

To be honest, I'm quite disappointed with the way this law has turned out. Several provinces have made quite a mess of their provincial elections at some point in the last few years.

Fwiw, I do think such a request can be made by provincial law though, even when there isn't a functional government. In the case of Cézembre, I believe the constitutions requires the Sénéchal to make such a request. I think it's fair therefore to interpret this request as automatic, so the Chancery will conduct the elections there.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

Though it doesn't stop a situation like Vuode where a law was passed that seems almost designed to prevent anyone not fully up to date with provincial law from running, resulting in two unopposed elections in a way that seems wildly undemocratic to me.

Well, the whole issue in M-M was that the M3 wasn't up-to-date with provincial law; and I think that, unless we want to re-federalize Senäts elections, we have to accept that ignorance of the law is no excuse.

To be honest, I'm quite disappointed with the way this law has turned out. Several provinces have made quite a mess of their provincial elections at some point in the last few years.

This is the problem with devolving functions to non-existent bodies. I'm not in favour of the NPW programme of abolishing the provinces altogether, but we need a merger or three desperately if we want them to be in charge of anything important.

[Açafat del Val]

What does a "breakdown of provincial Government" mean?

May I suggest the following instead?

Each province shall conduct by its own resources the election of each of its Senators as according to law, or may delegate this responsibility by law to the Chancery. In those cases when a province may be responsible for such an election but unable to carry through, whether for nonfeasance or the like, and when the inability shall have persisted and left inadequate time for other remedy, then the Chancery shall conduct the election on behalf of the province.

[Açafat del Val]

However, even having suggested that change, I might recommend that Senate elections be re-federalized altogether.

It seems needlessly burdensome on the Chancery that the SoS must know (or look up) eight different legal systems just to know whether a province does or does not conduct its own Senate election.

What is the opposition to this? Or, rather, why would Senate elections have been ever de-federalized?

[C. M. Siervicül]

However, even having suggested that change, I might recommend that Senate elections be re-federalized altogether.

Or as a compromise, allow the provinces to opt out of having the Chancery conduct their election, rather than requiring them to opt in. That way, the Chancery conducts the election by default. If a province has its act together and wants to conduct its own election, it can so notify the SoS. If there's been a "breakdown of provincial government" then no such notification will be provided and the SoS will proceed to conduct the election without needing to inquire into the status of the political institutions of each province.

[Eðo Grischun]

However, even having suggested that change, I might recommend that Senate elections be re-federalized altogether.

Or as a compromise, allow the provinces to opt out of having the Chancery conduct their election, rather than requiring them to opt in. That way, the Chancery conducts the election by default. If a province has its act together and wants to conduct its own election, it can so notify the SoS. If there's been a "breakdown of provincial government" then no such notification will be provided and the SoS will proceed to conduct the election without needing to inquire into the status of the political institutions of each province.

I might be remembering wrong, but wasn't that exactly how it used to work? I think one of the ModRad governments changed it from what you suggest to what we have now.

[C. M. Siervicül]

I might be remembering wrong, but wasn't that exactly how it used to work? I think one of the ModRad governments changed it from what you suggest to what we have now.

That's what I thought too, but I'm fuzzy on the details. I checked past versions of the OrgLaw on Wiki and at least as far as the Wiki versions go there was a change from exclusively Chancery-conducted elections to requiring the provinces to explicitly notify the Chancery if they want the election conducted by the Chancery in 2013. It may be that there were prior unsuccessful proposals that were different.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

Refederalisation of Senäts elections would be fine. Whichever gets broader support.

[King Txec]

Refederalisation of Senäts elections would be fine. Whichever gets broader support.

As the incoming SoS, I agree that re-federalizing Senäts elections would be prudent if only to avoid keeping up to date with provincial laws regarding this.

[Sir Ian Plätschisch]

I would not be in favor of banning provinces from holding Senate elections altogether. Perhaps we require provinces desiring to hold their own election to meet certain standards.

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

I would not be in favor of banning provinces from holding Senate elections altogether. Perhaps we require provinces desiring to hold their own election to meet certain standards.

Okay, here are two different versions, one which preserves "Provinces may opt in to Chancery elections", and one that shifts to "Provinces may opt out of Chancery elections". I'm indifferent between the two.

1. Unless a province explicitly requests that Chancery conduct the election to the Senate seat for that province, the province shall be responsible for doing so, and shall certify to the Chancery that the result represents the will of the people.
OR:
1. The Chancery shall be responsible for elections to the Senäts, except where a Provincial Government makes a request to conduct the election to the Senate seat for that province. Such requests shall be granted except as provided in subsection 2 below.

2. The Secretary of State shall publish minimum standards for Senäts elections run by the Provinces. If the Chancery deems that these standards are not met in a certain Province at a particular election, the Chancery may request a Cort injunction allowing the Chancery to assume control of the Senäts election in that Province.

[C. M. Siervicül]

Unless I'm missing something, the first option looks substantively the same as current law, except it eliminates the requirement that provinces certify their election results to the Chancery.

The first paragraph of the second option looks good to me, but I don't see the need for the second paragraph. The Chancery doesn't have responsibility for providing standards for and oversight of provincial elections under current law, so why add that (and only in the second option)?

[Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC]

Unless I'm missing something, the first option looks substantively the same as current law, except it eliminates the requirement that provinces certify their election results to the Chancery.

Fixed.

The first paragraph of the second option looks good to me, but I don't see the need for the second paragraph.

... that's precisely what the LCC Leader proposed above, lol. And Senäts elections are of Kingdom importance so it is right for the Chancery to have a right of oversight/scrutiny which does not apply to provincial elections.