NationStates

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2018 2:08 pm**

Category: Furtherment of Democracy
Strength: Mild

The World Assembly hereby bars member nations from invoking a person's debts as reason to deprive that person of the right to vote.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2018 2:08 pm**

This is short!
Yes it is. And the site has passed shorter.

But the real question is what length would add. The topic is intuitive enough that no amount of preamble is going to convince anyone to change positions. And there is nothing else that a resolution on this topic would want to cover without being illegal.

Adding sentences that do nothing does not have meaning beyond fitting some person's strange conception of what a proposal is 'supposed' to look like. To inculcate a heterodox conception of proposal format is good for authorial choice.

Badge hunting!
If you got extra badges for passing beyond one resolution, then I would need chest expansion surgery like Brezhnev. But you don't get extra badges. Go check my nation page and see the lack of 24 GA authorship badges cluttering it all up. If you had spoken like a year ago, you could have gone with "you're just doing this to get the award for most resolutions". But that happened already.

But what about some convoluted pathway to end-run about the resolution?

Make being in debt illegal. (1) RNT means that repeal argument is illegal (see [2018] GAS 8, if I recall correctly), because debt is useful and permits savings to be turned into useful capital improvements. (2) Even if it makes insolvency illegal, there now exist political barriers, on the margin, for a nation to impose such laws. And to see that they are fairly executed in line with WA law. National debates then have to be moved directly to the question of whether or not insolvency itself should be illegal, which is one that is much harder to win. (3) That's not a problem, I'll just write up the elimination of debt bondage.
Anything which executes the law in bad faith? See GA 2 art 9: "Every WA Member State has the duty to carry out in good faith its obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law, including this World Assembly, and it may not invoke provisions in its constitution or its laws as an excuse for failure to perform this duty". Doing so violates GA 2.
If the argument, at least in the form sent in the all WA telegram, were made in a repeal, it would have been removed for lying in a repeal (i.e. violation of the Honest Mistake rule).

Also, proposal which attempts to legislate on the enfranchisement of persons under incarceration is illegal for violating section 3 of GA 419 ("Reserves for member nations the liberty to legislate on the issue of enfranchisement for individuals under incarceration").

It's too vague!!!
Member states must carry out the duties in WA resolutions. This explicitly describes a duty. This is hardly vague.

What about an enforcement mechanism?
I built it already. And there's more. There's no reason to include an enforcement mechanism when these resolution exist. Moreover, doing so would likely duplicate or contradict these resolutions, making the proposal illegal.

You can't pass something without a preamble!!
It's done in real government legislation all the time. Look. No preamble.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2018 5:39 pm**

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
The World Assembly hereby

Bars member nations from invoking the non-payment of court fees or other debts owed to the government as a reason to deprive a person of ~~the~~ suffrage.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:37 pm**

Very interesting approach. The mandate itself is rather inoffensive. May I assume a category of FoD, Mild?

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:45 pm**

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
The World Assembly hereby

Bars member nations from invoking the non-payment of court fees or other debts owed to the government as a reason to deprive a person of the suffrage.

This has a loophole.
Step 1: Criminalize non-payment of court fees or other debts owed to the government.
Step 2: Make the punishment two days of imprisonment for each day they don't pay.
Step 3: Disenfranchise incarcerated criminals.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:46 pm**

Wallenburg wrote:Very interesting approach. The mandate itself is rather inoffensive. May I assume a category of FoD, Mild?

Yea. Posted on mobile. Short mode.

Posted: **Thu Nov 01, 2018 6:48 pm**

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:Very interesting approach. The mandate itself is rather inoffensive. May I assume a category of FoD, Mild?

Yea. Posted on mobile. Short mode.

Good. Now, why do you want to enact these measures?

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2018 5:09 am**

(OOC: No preamble? Whilst there’s is nothing wrong with not having a long proposal, this entire thing could fit inside a tweet. I don’t think the majority of the WA voting body will look favourably on any proposal that doesn’t look similar to the last three that reached vote, regardless of how much sense the measure makes.)

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2018 7:24 am**

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
The World Assembly hereby bars member nations from invoking the non-payment of court fees or other debts owed to the government as a reason to deprive a person of the franchise.

"Although the World Assembly is quite willing to accept member nations that aren't democratic -- and therefore don't have any 'franchise' -- at all? My government is opposed to the idea of giving those non-democratic governments any say in how our political system should work, and is therefore opposed as a matter of principle to proposals such as this."

"<mutter, grumble, mutter>"

Artorrios o SouthWoods,
ChairBear, Bears Armed Mission at the World Assembly.

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:41 pm**

I strongly suggest a "hereby" to be put in there, between "Assembly" and "bars". We're not barbarians, after all. I also suggest you replace "the franchise" with "suffrage", which is a whopping 5 characters shorter.

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2018 8:45 pm**

little short but support the idea. People owing debts should not be disenfranchised.

Posted: **Fri Nov 02, 2018 10:27 pm**

Bears Armed wrote:"Although the World Assembly is quite willing to accept member nations that aren't democratic -- and therefore don't have any 'franchise' -- at all? My government is opposed to the idea of giving those non-democratic governments any say in how our political system should work, and is therefore opposed as a matter of principle to proposals such as this."

"<mutter, grumble, mutter>"

Artorrios o SouthWoods,
ChairBear, Bears Armed Mission at the World Assembly.

We concur with his Excellency ChairBear o Southwoods. This assembly has meddled far too much on the workings of member states' internal political systems and affairs. It is bad enough we have to suffer imbeciles, the infirm, and criminal elements already. We do not need to add the paupers and beggars to the list.

Posted: **Sat Nov 03, 2018 9:04 am**

OOC: Should probably spell out which franchise.

franchise (countable and uncountable, plural franchises)
The right to vote at a public election or referendum; see: suffrage, suffragette.
A right or privilege officially granted to a person, a group of people, or a company by a government.
An acknowledgment of a corporation's existence and ownership.
The authorization granted by a company to sell or distribute its goods or services in a certain area.
A business operating under such authorization, a franchisee.
A legal exemption from jurisdiction.
The membership of a corporation or state; citizenship.
The district or jurisdiction to which a particular privilege extends; the limits of an immunity; hence, an asylum or sanctuary.
(sports) The collection of organizations in the history of a sports team; the tradition of a sports team as an entity, extending beyond the contemporary organization.
(business, marketing) The positive influence on the buying behavior of customers exerted by the reputation of a company or a brand.
The loose collection of fictional works pertaining to a particular universe, including literary, film or television series from various sources.
Exemption from constraint or oppression; freedom; liberty.

Unless you're intentionally making it loopholeable to death.

Posted: **Sat Nov 03, 2018 2:45 pm**

"The People's Republic of Bananaistan stands opposed to this. It's patently a thinly disguised attempt by imperialists to topple international socialism."

- Ted

Posted: **Sat Nov 03, 2018 2:47 pm**

Bananaistan wrote:"The People's Republic of Bananaistan stands opposed to this. It's patently a thinly disguised attempt by imperialists to topple international socialism."

- Ted

"Oh, then we support this."

Posted: **Sat Nov 03, 2018 3:05 pm**

Bananaistan wrote:"The People's Republic of Bananaistan stands opposed to this. It's patently a thinly disguised attempt by imperialists to topple international socialism."

Lolwtf? This doesn't make any sense.

Posted: **Sat Nov 03, 2018 5:50 pm**

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
Bananaistan wrote:"The People's Republic of Bananaistan stands opposed to this. It's patently a thinly disguised attempt by imperialists to topple international socialism."

Lolwtf? This doesn't make any sense.

Indeed. Nothing in this resolution stops socialism.

Posted: **Sat Nov 03, 2018 6:56 pm**

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
The World Assembly hereby bars member nations from invoking a person's debts as reason to deprive that person of the right to vote.

OOC: Better, but I'd suggest the addition of "in elections which they would otherwise be eligible to vote" or the same in less sleepy language. But point being not giving such prisoners the right to vote for things they normally wouldn't be allowed to vote (like, say, any vote restricted to members of a certain organization, be it religious or political or organizational or whatnot).

Old Hope wrote:
Imperium Anglorum wrote:Lolwtf? This doesn't make any sense.

Indeed. Nothing in this resolution stops socialism.

OOC: IA's name literally has the word "Imperium" in it.

Posted: **Sat Nov 03, 2018 7:56 pm**

Araraukar wrote:OOC: IA's name literally has the word "Imperium" in it.

Look at this sentence: 'It's patently a thinly disguised attempt ... to topple international socialism'. If you apply something like a Wambaugh's Inversion Test, hey look, the claim that it topples international socialism is still there! It's almost as if disproving claim B when a sentence claims both A and B, doesn't disprove A.

The other thing you are claiming doesn't need to be put into the proposal. If you claim that a person cannot vote because they are currently incarcerated, that is not invoking a person's debt as a reason to deprive them of the vote. It is invoking the fact they are incarcerated.

Posted: **Sat Nov 03, 2018 8:54 pm**

Imperium Anglorum wrote:
The World Assembly hereby bars member nations from invoking a person's debts as reason to deprive that person of the right to vote.

"This version has the support of the Wallenburgian delegation."

Bananaistan wrote:"The People's Republic of Bananaistan stands opposed to this. It's patently a thinly disguised attempt by imperialists to topple international socialism."

- Ted

"Only a despot denies his citizens the right to vote. Your authoritarian opposition stands in the way of the progress of the workers' revolution."

Posted: **Sun Nov 04, 2018 1:05 am**

Desmosthenes and Burke wrote:
Bears Armed wrote:"Although the World Assembly is quite willing to accept member nations that aren't democratic -- and therefore don't have any 'franchise' -- at all? My government is opposed to the idea of giving those non-democratic governments any say in how our political system should work, and is therefore opposed as a matter of principle to proposals such as this."

"<mutter, grumble, mutter>"

Artorrios o SouthWoods,
ChairBear, Bears Armed Mission at the World Assembly.

We concur with his Excellency ChairBear o Southwoods. This assembly has meddled far too much on the workings of member states' internal political systems and affairs. It is bad enough we have to suffer imbeciles, the infirm, and criminal elements already. We do not need to add the paupers and beggars to the list.

Well, let's hope you never experience an economic depression.

Posted: **Sun Nov 04, 2018 7:26 am**

Wallenburg wrote:"Only a despot denies his citizens the right to vote. Your authoritarian opposition stands in the way of the progress of the workers' revolution."

"And yet benign dictatorship may result in a near-utopia, for workers and unemployed both," Johan muttered, not looking up from the novel he was reading.

Posted: **Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:23 am**

Araraukar wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:"Only a despot denies his citizens the right to vote. Your authoritarian opposition stands in the way of the progress of the workers' revolution."

"And yet benign dictatorship may result in a near-utopia, for workers and unemployed both," Johan muttered, not looking up from the novel he was reading.

“And you think every dictator who follows you will be benevolent?”

Posted: **Sun Nov 04, 2018 10:43 am**

Araraukar wrote:
Wallenburg wrote:"Only a despot denies his citizens the right to vote. Your authoritarian opposition stands in the way of the progress of the workers' revolution."

"And yet benign dictatorship may result in a near-utopia, for workers and unemployed both," Johan muttered, not looking up from the novel he was reading.

"Benignity and dictatorship are mutually exclusive. No people is happy that is not free."

Posted: **Sun Nov 04, 2018 12:00 pm**

Wallenburg wrote:
Araraukar wrote:"And yet benign dictatorship may result in a near-utopia, for workers and unemployed both," Johan muttered, not looking up from the novel he was reading.

"Benignity and dictatorship are mutually exclusive. No people is happy that is not free."

"Do you have any argument to back this statement we disagree with up?"

NationStates

[PASSED] Debtor Voting Rights

[PASSED] Debtor Voting Rights

Frequently asked questions