Domestic Migration

[Eðo Grischun]

Asking questions and getting responses like this -- rather than the other reasoned ones in this thread -- can really bring out the meaner and nastier tendencies, don't you think?

Yeah, how much did you consider "nastier tendencies" when you posted that you thought that your previous support for Reunision was a mistake? Perhaps you don't understand how such exclusionary tendencies make other Talossans feel unwelcome, and under threat.

Anyway I was sure that there was positive statute law which said "anyone who immigrates during the election period gets a vote". But I can't find it, so I'm feeling confused. Was there such a law and it was repealed?

Might have been part of the previous OrgLaw?


edit... Whether it was ever explicitly stated like that or not though, it's always been implicit in the fact that all citizens have a right to vote. 

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

Why would we suspend immigration? The chances of someone completing the process from start to finish in the 15 days of an election are incredibly slim. If someone were to be granted citizenship while an election was ongoing, why would we not allow them to exercise their rights and vote?

I think the reason could be because of the perceptions of impropriety (not necessarily something nefarious, but just poor optics).

I think this is a fair enough concern, but this also happens incredibly infrequently.  Indeed, I can't think of it ever happening before!  If a province is worried enough about it, they could pass a law providing that only those who are citizens of the province at the start of Balloting Day get a vote.  I might just be blanking, but I don't think there's any Organic conflict there.  Not sure it would be a good idea to do that, though, until a problem actually happens.  No reason to risk disenfranchising people by accident!

I think that would definitely be an Organic conflict. 

"ORG.V.4: During the election period as defined in this article, the Secretary of State shall in every particular conduct the election according to the election laws in such a manner which affords to every citizen the opportunity to cast a vote for the party of his choice"

Every naturalised citizen gets a vote at some point during the election period, so if a prospective becomes fully naturalised before an election ends it would be InOrganic to deny them their vote.

We definitely shouldn't ever have a system where the Organic rights of one citizen is greater or lesser than those of another citizen across provinces either.  Say, Vuode adopted your proposal.  Then say a situation arose where a Vuodean and a Cezembrean naturalised part way through an election leading to the Cezebrean getting to vote and the Vuodean not getting to vote.  I can't see how this squares with OrgLaw.

Well, that provision specifically says "according to the election laws," right?  The Chancery is obligated to run the elections the same for everyone that they do them for, but a province that runs its own election has its own election laws -- and I'm not aware of any Organic provision that would stop them from making Balloting Day the "registration deadline" for voters.

Again, that's a bad idea and silly, but I don't know why it couldn't happen.  And then certainly someone who switched provinces to that new province or who immigrated during the election would lose their chance to vote for their new senator, as far as I can see.

I don't think you can eliminate the theoretical possibility that some citizens will have an easier time voting than others, unless you just nationalize all elections.  For example, Vuode does not allow write-in candidates, and closes its candidate registration for the Senats ten days before the vote.  That is arguably less free than a province that does permit write-in candidates, right?  Both yourself and its previous senator won uncontested elections that were over before Balloting Day even arrived.  But no one begrudges Vuode its election laws, since Vuode is in charge of Vuode!  Not a big deal, really. Each province is afforded the right to conduct its own internal affairs.  And I don't think a citizen of the province could sue over it.

[Eðo Grischun]

To be fair, it's probably something that would need to be tested in Court for a declaratory judgement.

The clause I cited, I think, would only apply to Cosa elections and not for Senates or Provincial Assemblies.  But, I'm still of the view that, for Cosa elections at least, a citizen is a citizen and they can't be denied a vote.  The clause on "according to election law" is followed by "in such a manner which affords to every citizen the opportunity to cast a vote". To me, that means the election law mentioned can't force a situation where a citizen is ever unable to vote for a party to the Cosa.

[Baron Alexandreu Davinescu]

But, I'm still of the view that, for Cosa elections at least, a citizen is a citizen and they can't be denied a vote.  The clause on "according to election law" is followed by "in such a manner which affords to every citizen the opportunity to cast a vote". To me, that means the election law mentioned can't force a situation where a citizen is ever unable to vote for a party to the Cosa.

I'd agree unreservedly.