This version of Wittenberg is now the legal national forum for Talossa! Feel free to explore it, and to check out the threads for feedback, requests and criticisms to make sure Wittenberg is tailored to you.

Author Topic: "Compromise on the Compromise"  (Read 1011 times)

Offline Ian Plätschisch

  • Minister of Finance
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 567
    • View Profile
"Compromise on the Compromise"
« on: May 08, 2021, 09:36:33 PM »
WHEREAS blah blah blah

THEREFORE Org II.3 is replace in its entirety with:

1.   Every seven years, a Convocation shall be called composed of:
eight MCs, chosen by the parties represented in the Cosa in proportion to their Cosa seats;
all Senators;
the Seneschál;
all Justices of the UC;
all provincial heads of government;
all officers of the Royal Civil Service;
all Talossans who have been a citizen for at least ten years

2.   Every member of the Convocation shall have one vote. All the discussions of the Convocation will be open, but its votes shall be by secret ballot.
3.   The Convocation shall be chaired by the Senior Judge of the CpI, or in their absence the next available CpI judge in order of seniority, unless the Convocation decides differently.
4.   The members of the Convocation shall express by secret ballot whether they desire the King to remain on the throne.
5.   Should more than 60% of the Convocation express that they desire the King not remain on the throne, then the Convocation shall reconvene in six months; it shall be constituted as described above, but not necessarily with the same members.
6.   At this meeting of the Convocation, a new King of Talossa (who may be the current King) shall be chosen. The candidate who receives the expressed support of 2/3 of the Convocation shall immediately receive the title of "Heir Presumptive".
7.   The Heir Presumptive shall swear an oath promising to protect and uphold the Organic Law of Talossa and the rights of all its citizens, and thereupon become King of Talossa, replacing the previous King (unless both are the same person).
8.   The Convocation shall assemble immediately to select a new King at any time that there is no King. The Uppermost Cort shall be a Council of Regency until an Heir Presumptive is chosen.

Ureu q'estadra sa:
Ian Plätschisch (Sen-MM)

Offline Ian Plätschisch

  • Minister of Finance
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 567
    • View Profile
Re: "Compromise on the Compromise"
« Reply #1 on: May 08, 2021, 09:37:07 PM »
The wording could stand to be improved, but this is the gist of what the LCC is supporting.

Offline Eðo Grischun

  • Distain, MinSTUFF
  • Citizen
  • Posts: 544
    • Talossan since: 20 February 2009

    • View Profile
Re: "Compromise on the Compromise"
« Reply #2 on: May 09, 2021, 09:18:29 AM »
What is the reason behind the six month delay between a failed "VoC" and the second convening?
The Rt. Hon. Senator Éovart Grischun S.H.

Distain and Minister of STUFF
Senator of Vuode

Offline Ian Plätschisch

  • Minister of Finance
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 567
    • View Profile
Re: "Compromise on the Compromise"
« Reply #3 on: May 09, 2021, 04:21:49 PM »
What is the reason behind the six month delay between a failed "VoC" and the second convening?
Essentially to stop the process from going to quickly: if the King happened to become briefly unpopular around the time of the vote, the waiting period would prevent him from being immediately replaced, and makes sure the decision is well-considered

Offline Miestră Schivă, UrN

  • Citizen
  • Posts: 1308
  • Semi-retired in a hole
    • Talossan since: 2004-06-12

    • View Profile
    • Free Democrats of Talossa
Re: "Compromise on the Compromise"
« Reply #4 on: May 09, 2021, 04:55:53 PM »
What is the reason behind the six month delay between a failed "VoC" and the second convening?
Essentially to stop the process from going to quickly: if the King happened to become briefly unpopular around the time of the vote, the waiting period would prevent him from being immediately replaced, and makes sure the decision is well-considered

Six months is an entire Cosa term. Remember that Talossan politics happens in "dog years". Three months is surely more reasonable.
JOIN THE FREE DEMOCRATS OF TALOSSA - ask me how!

¡LADINTSCHIÇETZ-VOI - rogetz-mhe cacsa!

"IS INACTIVITY BAD? I THINK NOT!" - Lord Hooligan

Offline Txosuè Éiric Rôibeardescù

  • Citizen
  • Posts: 231
    • Talossan since: 2014-02-21

    • View Profile
Re: "Compromise on the Compromise"
« Reply #5 on: May 09, 2021, 05:15:45 PM »
What is the reason behind the six month delay between a failed "VoC" and the second convening?
Essentially to stop the process from going to quickly: if the King happened to become briefly unpopular around the time of the vote, the waiting period would prevent him from being immediately replaced, and makes sure the decision is well-considered

Six months is an entire Cosa term. Remember that Talossan politics happens in "dog years". Three months is surely more reasonable.

I think that also the point, It removes the incentive to remove the king purely for political gain.
Túischac'h of the 55th Cosa
MC, 55th Cosa, League of Center Conservatives
Secretary-General of the League of centre conservatives
Member of the L'Etats de Cézembre

Offline Eðo Grischun

  • Distain, MinSTUFF
  • Citizen
  • Posts: 544
    • Talossan since: 20 February 2009

    • View Profile
Re: "Compromise on the Compromise"
« Reply #6 on: May 10, 2021, 09:24:39 AM »
But nothing in the six months changes.  The VoC fails, then six months pass, then a new King "shall" be chosen.

The waiting period doesn't actually do anything to ensure the decision is well considered.  The decision would have been made and no amount of waiting period changes that. 
The Rt. Hon. Senator Éovart Grischun S.H.

Distain and Minister of STUFF
Senator of Vuode

Offline Ian Plätschisch

  • Minister of Finance
  • Administrator
  • Posts: 567
    • View Profile
Re: "Compromise on the Compromise"
« Reply #7 on: May 10, 2021, 11:53:37 AM »
But nothing in the six months changes.  The VoC fails, then six months pass, then a new King "shall" be chosen.

The waiting period doesn't actually do anything to ensure the decision is well considered.  The decision would have been made and no amount of waiting period changes that.
If there was temporary dislike of the King for whatever reason, then, by the time six months had past, the Convocation would be more inclined to select the current King again.

Offline Eðo Grischun

  • Distain, MinSTUFF
  • Citizen
  • Posts: 544
    • Talossan since: 20 February 2009

    • View Profile
Re: "Compromise on the Compromise"
« Reply #8 on: May 10, 2021, 04:26:46 PM »
But nothing in the six months changes.  The VoC fails, then six months pass, then a new King "shall" be chosen.

The waiting period doesn't actually do anything to ensure the decision is well considered.  The decision would have been made and no amount of waiting period changes that.
If there was temporary dislike of the King for whatever reason, then, by the time six months had past, the Convocation would be more inclined to select the current King again.

Gotcha now.  Thanks.
The Rt. Hon. Senator Éovart Grischun S.H.

Distain and Minister of STUFF
Senator of Vuode

Offline Miestră Schivă, UrN

  • Citizen
  • Posts: 1308
  • Semi-retired in a hole
    • Talossan since: 2004-06-12

    • View Profile
    • Free Democrats of Talossa
Re: "Compromise on the Compromise"
« Reply #9 on: August 24, 2021, 05:14:25 PM »
Well, I suppose this once more becomes a live issue.

My position is that it must never be more complicated or difficult to get rid of the King through this Convocation procedure than it would to simply delete OrgLaw II.3 through the regular amendment mechanism. That is, a 3/4 majority in the Cosa, 5 Senators, and a simple majority in referendum. Because otherwise, what's the point? The current OrgLaw II.4 will never be invoked because it's harder - requiring a successful case in the CpI and a 2/3 referendum victory.

That is to say, I now support this measure in principle - i.e. as a thing we should do right now - but the thing is that if a King starts acting the goat in the midst of a seven year "term", a sufficiently riled-up legislature will just delete this new OrgLaw II.3 and choose a new King / declare a Republic, making this reform otiose.

I should also point out that this proposal has a similar problem to 55RZ21, in that it instantly puts John W. out of a job, so he's more likely to veto it.

Can I recommend the following amendment:

1) that this amendment replace OrgLaw II.4, rather than OrgLaw II.3;
2) add a provision that 2/3 of the Cosa and 2/3 of the Senäts will be authorised to call one of these convocations at any time, with the same rules (inc. six-month cooling-off period).
« Last Edit: August 24, 2021, 05:18:06 PM by Miestră Schivă, UrN »
JOIN THE FREE DEMOCRATS OF TALOSSA - ask me how!

¡LADINTSCHIÇETZ-VOI - rogetz-mhe cacsa!

"IS INACTIVITY BAD? I THINK NOT!" - Lord Hooligan

Offline Glüc da Dhi S.H.

  • Posts: 473
  • Taking a break from Talossa
    • View Profile
Re: "Compromise on the Compromise"
« Reply #10 on: August 24, 2021, 06:11:33 PM »
Some suggestions:

* remove MC's, Senators and the Seneschal from the convocation (or even better: explicitly exclude them). The King should ideally be some counterbalance to the short term politics that govern us and represent its long-term culture and history. I'd be nice if the system that produces the monarch was completely separated from the partisan politics which already dominates everything else.
(We shouldn't really want parties with silly names like the King Lüc Party explicitly campaigning on their position in the convocation whenever a convocation is coming up)

* The convocation should probably also be convened whenever we are without a King for other reasons than the convocation removing him.

* Maybe establish some explicit procedure for convening the convocation. I.e. have someone (the SoS?) call all eligible members (maybe an email requirement) and then set some deadline at which point the convocation is fixed (and anyone who hasn't responded to the call at that point is not part of that particular convocation.

* Some formal system for the various voting round when choosing a new King. For example:
Each vote takes two days and is preceded by three days of discussion.
New votes are called until a candidate reaches 2/3rd of the vote
In the first two rounds all votes are free
In the third round members are only allowed to vote for candidates who received votes in the second round (or abstain)
In the fourth round members are only allowed to vote for candidates who received at least 10% of the vote in the third round (or abstain).
In the fifth round members are only allowed to vote for the top 4 candidates from the fourth round (or abstain).
In the sixth round members are only allowed to vote for the top 3 candidates from the fifth round (or abstain).
In the seventh and eight round members are only allowed to vote for the top 2 candidates from the sixth round (or abstain).
In the ninth and tenth round members are only allowed to vote for or against the candidate with the most votes in the eight round.
If after ten rounds the remaining candidate does not get 2/3rd of the vote, the convocation is dissolved and a referendum is held on the remaining candidate during the next election. If the candidate fails a new convocation is called the month following the election.

The above is just an example, but this is supposed to be a major event that solidifies the Monarchy and its legitimacy for another seven years. Some overly formal and pompous rules would be nice (plus there should definitely be some rules to establish what happens if no candidate gets 2/3rd of the vote anyway).

Offline Miestră Schivă, UrN

  • Citizen
  • Posts: 1308
  • Semi-retired in a hole
    • Talossan since: 2004-06-12

    • View Profile
    • Free Democrats of Talossa
Re: "Compromise on the Compromise"
« Reply #11 on: August 25, 2021, 04:46:45 AM »
IMHO "overly formal and pompous rules" are a curse on Talossa which make it more trouble than it's worth to do anything, and then people complain about falling activity. Most of the legislative activity I'm interested in is eliminating over-complex rules.

If we're going to make things pompous, let's do it ceremonially. Like require all members of the Conclave to wear wigs and knee-breeches.
JOIN THE FREE DEMOCRATS OF TALOSSA - ask me how!

¡LADINTSCHIÇETZ-VOI - rogetz-mhe cacsa!

"IS INACTIVITY BAD? I THINK NOT!" - Lord Hooligan

Offline Françal I. Lux

  • Citizen
  • Posts: 77
    • View Profile
Re: "Compromise on the Compromise"
« Reply #12 on: August 25, 2021, 04:13:57 PM »
I agree—the more complex and elaborate the procedure, the less like people will participate since it’s too much of a hassle for most.

Also, while I’m not opposed in principle to a non-partisan Electoral College be created to elect the monarch, practically speaking, given the limited number of active citizens we have, it’s still gonna end up being us who are appointed as electors in the end.
F. I. Lux, Minister of Interior

Offline Miestră Schivă, UrN

  • Citizen
  • Posts: 1308
  • Semi-retired in a hole
    • Talossan since: 2004-06-12

    • View Profile
    • Free Democrats of Talossa
Re: "Compromise on the Compromise"
« Reply #13 on: August 25, 2021, 04:29:25 PM »
Yeah; a conclave restricted to non-Parliamentarians would be one dominated by inactive citizens whom, by Glüc's own reckoning, mostly have no idea what's going on. The kind of conclave that would become a rubber stamp for a long-term incumbent King. Note that I have no issue with the number of MZs being restricted to stop it becoming a rubber stamp for the legislature, in converse.

The other way to get "the broad masses" involved would be to require a new King to win a referendum; but that has the problem of making the process not only more complicated, but more political in the bad way that no monarchist (and few Republicans) want.

Personally, I think Senator Plätschisch's proposal + my amendments is "good to go".
« Last Edit: August 25, 2021, 06:04:46 PM by Miestră Schivă, UrN »
JOIN THE FREE DEMOCRATS OF TALOSSA - ask me how!

¡LADINTSCHIÇETZ-VOI - rogetz-mhe cacsa!

"IS INACTIVITY BAD? I THINK NOT!" - Lord Hooligan

Offline Miestră Schivă, UrN

  • Citizen
  • Posts: 1308
  • Semi-retired in a hole
    • Talossan since: 2004-06-12

    • View Profile
    • Free Democrats of Talossa
Re: "Compromise on the Compromise"
« Reply #14 on: August 25, 2021, 04:31:25 PM »
(plus there should definitely be some rules to establish what happens if no candidate gets 2/3rd of the vote anyway).

Then the UC continues as a Council of Regency until the Convocation gets its act together. Like what happens with papal elections. A pity we can't actually lock them up and put them on bread-and-water.
JOIN THE FREE DEMOCRATS OF TALOSSA - ask me how!

¡LADINTSCHIÇETZ-VOI - rogetz-mhe cacsa!

"IS INACTIVITY BAD? I THINK NOT!" - Lord Hooligan