[TWI ONLY] The Senate of the Western Isles

[Verdon]

We really need to establish some concrete rules so this doesn't happen again and cause such an unnecessary uproar. Wildelyn you shouldn't have done that without PPU's permission. Otherwise I would have supported your rights.

Brigs up the interesting question of whether or not we have any current laws that protect use of identity. That would definitely be something worth passing.

[Agadar]

We really need to establish some concrete rules so this doesn't happen again and cause such an unnecessary uproar. Wildelyn you shouldn't have done that without PPU's permission. Otherwise I would have supported your rights.

During my time as a member of TWI, Wildelyn's incident was the only incident ever that would warrant the establishment of such rules.

I suppose we could add a rule that says that the Speaker can remove bills from the floor that are obviously blatant troll attempts or something of the like.

We really need to establish some concrete rules so this doesn't happen again and cause such an unnecessary uproar. Wildelyn you shouldn't have done that without PPU's permission. Otherwise I would have supported your rights.

Brigs up the interesting question of whether or not we have any current laws that protect use of identity. That would definitely be something worth passing.

There are laws that make it illegal to besmirch another nation's reputation, and to impersonate another nation, both which could be applied to Wildelyn's PPU Prince bill.

Anyhow, these aren't pressing matters as Wildelyn has been banned, so I propose we suspend debate on those subjects until after PPU's bill has been debated and voted upon.

[Dashgrinaar]

We move on to the bill presented by the Pacific Peace Union.

[Dashgrinaar]

I propose this to the Senate, the idea came up after I had a dispute with a member over him not being able to run for Justice and Senator at the same time. I believe it is a risk and can lead to issues down the road such as interfering with the law against holding two offices at once. It will also stop greedy people who simply wish to have a government title and who have no passion or desire to lead from giving themselves multiple chances of being elected.

Dual Candidacy Amendment

---

“An amendment to limit the number of offices one can run for simultaneously."

---

(1) Amends Article V, Section 4 " Any non-officer can challenge an officer for their position through an election. At this point any other non-officer who was not the challenger can also run for the position in the same election. Challenge elections can only occur after the defending officer has spent a reasonable period of time in office, or the defending officer is inactive or otherwise clearly not fulfilling their duties."

to

"Any non-officer, who is not a Senate candidate, can challenge an officer for their position through an election. At this point any other non-officer who was not the challenger and is not a Senate candidate, Can also run for the position in the same election. Challenge elections can only occur after the defending officer has spent a reasonable period of time in office, or the defending officer is inactive or otherwise clearly not fulfilling their duties."

(2) Amends Article V, Section 5 "All elections occur via direct member nation vote. All non-officers may run. There is no limit on the amount of candidates that may run."

to

"All elections occur via direct member nation vote. All non-officers, who are not Senate candidates, may run. There is no limit on the amount of candidates that may run.

[The Pacific Peace Union]

Thank you Dash! I am open to any re-wording as Agadar offered!

[Verdon]

There are laws that make it illegal to besmirch another nation's reputation, and to impersonate another nation, both which could be applied to Wildelyn's PPU Prince bill.

Ah, but are there any laws forbidding use of another nation's likeness or reputation without their consent? I wasn't really considering the bill itself but other instances where member nations might reference another nation without consulting them first. An issue for a later time.


Moving on to the legislation, why do we need to prohibit someone from being a senate candidate and running for office at the same time?

[The Pacific Peace Union]

There are laws that make it illegal to besmirch another nation's reputation, and to impersonate another nation, both which could be applied to Wildelyn's PPU Prince bill.

Ah, but are there any laws forbidding use of another nation's likeness or reputation without their consent? I wasn't really considering the bill itself but other instances where member nations might reference another nation without consulting them first. An issue for a later time.


Moving on to the legislation, why do we need to prohibit someone from being a senate candidate and running for office at the same time?

I believe it is a risk and can lead to issues down the road such as interfering with the law against holding two offices at once. It will also stop greedy people who simply wish to have a government title and who have no passion or desire to lead from giving themselves multiple chances of being elected. It also makes sense, if we have a law forbidding multiple offices, why would we allow someone to run for multiple office. The reason I put "Senator candidates" if because that's the only real way you could run for two offices at once here, since Van does not hold multiple election polls at once.

[Doppler]

What about adding a minimal time period for being in office before an officer can be challenged? For extra clarity of course.

[Vancouvia]

What about adding a minimal time period for being in office before an officer can be challenged? For extra clarity of course.

That's the President's responsiblity

[Verdon]

I believe it is a risk and can lead to issues down the road such as interfering with the law against holding two offices at once. It will also stop greedy people who simply wish to have a government title and who have no passion or desire to lead from giving themselves multiple chances of being elected. It also makes sense, if we have a law forbidding multiple offices, why would we allow someone to run for multiple office. The reason I put "Senator candidates" if because that's the only real way you could run for two offices at once here, since Van does not hold multiple election polls at once.

I understand your concern, but the problem will fix itself in one of the outcomes. If the nation is elected to office, it will lose it's vouches since you must resign from your position before running for another. If it is not elected to office, It will keep it's vouches and remain a candidate. I don't really see the problem?

What about adding a minimal time period for being in office before an officer can be challenged? For extra clarity of course.

That was discussed in the second constitution reform. I believe it was decided to keep it ambiguous as to not be burdened by anyone who gets elected then immediately disappears or becomes otherwise unsuited for the position right away.

[Dashgrinaar]

Look at it like this. If this amendment doesn't pass, and we have an election, for say, Justice, then a candidate who is a Senator must resign to run. However, one who has one or two vouches does not, letting them have something to fall back onto if they lose. The Senator does not have that.

[The Pacific Peace Union]

I believe it is a risk and can lead to issues down the road such as interfering with the law against holding two offices at once. It will also stop greedy people who simply wish to have a government title and who have no passion or desire to lead from giving themselves multiple chances of being elected. It also makes sense, if we have a law forbidding multiple offices, why would we allow someone to run for multiple office. The reason I put "Senator candidates" if because that's the only real way you could run for two offices at once here, since Van does not hold multiple election polls at once.

I understand your concern, but the problem will fix itself in one of the outcomes. If the nation is elected to office, it will lose it's vouches since you must resign from your position before running for another. If it is not elected to office, It will keep it's vouches and remain a candidate. I don't really see the problem?

theres no commitment, they have an automatic safety net when no one else does. It gives them the confidence to run for every government position because if they lose they still got their vouchers. It is an advantage.

[Verdon]

theres no commitment, they have an automatic safety net when no one else does. It gives them the confidence to run for every government position because if they lose they still got their vouchers. It is an advantage.

But it's only a safety net if they never become senator. How good is your safety net if it requires you to perpetually lose?

[The Pacific Peace Union]

theres no commitment, they have an automatic safety net when no one else does. It gives them the confidence to run for every government position because if they lose they still got their vouchers. It is an advantage.

But it's only a safety net if they never become senator. How good is your safety net if it requires you to perpetually lose?

Being one voucher away from a senator is a safety net. You know how easy it is to just ask new members to vouch for you and they do? Callumstan just asked me if he could keep his two vouchers if he loosed the Justice election since he can just fall back and gain that one voucher probably by next sunday and become a Senator. It is a easy way to just always have a chance at government. People should be committed to the role they want, thats a good government servant.

[Vancouvia]

Look at it like this. If this amendment doesn't pass, and we have an election, for say, Justice, then a candidate who is a Senator must resign to run. However, one who has one or two vouches does not, letting them have something to fall back onto if they lose. The Senator does not have that.

This changed my mind on this and made me agree.

[The Pacific Peace Union]

Thank you Dashgrinaar for your amazing point

[Verdon]

Okay, but a senator that resigns from the senate to run for another position and then looses that election can just appeal to the nations that were vouching for them before the election by the same Sunday.

[The Pacific Peace Union]

Okay, but a senator that resigns from the senate to run for another position and then looses that election can just appeal to the nations that were vouching for them before the election by the same Sunday.

I have not seen people give their vouchers back like that yet and I have been in office since August. People typically re-vouch within a couple days.

[The Pacific Peace Union]

The Senate has been the fall back of many, many officers in this region. It should not be seen as a second option.

[Agadar]

After further considerations, there is only one rewording I would like to see, and that is in the title: 'Dual Candidacy Amendment' seems to imply the amendment seeks to legalize running for two offices at once. I would change this to 'Single Candidacy Amendment' to imply what the amendment is trying to achieve: to make it so people can only run for one office at a time.

[The Pacific Peace Union]

After further considerations, there is only one rewording I would like to see, and that is in the title: 'Dual Candidacy Amendment' seems to imply the amendment seeks to legalize running for two offices at once. I would change this to 'Single Candidacy Amendment' to imply what the amendment is trying to achieve: to make it so people can only run for one office at a time.

Single Candidacy Amendment

---

“An amendment to limit the number of offices one can run for simultaneously."

---

(1) Amends Article V, Section 4 " Any non-officer can challenge an officer for their position through an election. At this point any other non-officer who was not the challenger can also run for the position in the same election. Challenge elections can only occur after the defending officer has spent a reasonable period of time in office, or the defending officer is inactive or otherwise clearly not fulfilling their duties."

to

"Any non-officer, who is not a Senate candidate, can challenge an officer for their position through an election. At this point any other non-officer who was not the challenger and is not a Senate candidate, can also run for the position in the same election. Challenge elections can only occur after the defending officer has spent a reasonable period of time in office, or the defending officer is inactive or otherwise clearly not fulfilling their duties."

(2) Amends Article V, Section 5 "All elections occur via direct member nation vote. All non-officers may run. There is no limit on the amount of candidates that may run."

to

"All elections occur via direct member nation vote. All non-officers, who are not Senate candidates, may run. There is no limit on the amount of candidates that may run.

[The Pacific Peace Union]

Any other re-wording suggestions or additions?

[Dashgrinaar]

Some grammar stuff, but it's fine overall.

There is a "Can" that doesn't need to be capitalized. Second block.

[The Pacific Peace Union]

English isn't my thing e.e

Fixed it, thanks!

[Doppler]

Is everyone done debating? If so I motion to vote.