[PASSED] Debtor Voting Rights

[The New California Republic]

Atlantonia, I am glad you agree with me. But I will not show Bias, I propose that both sides DIRECTLY respond to me with the best evidence you can muster.

Thank you - Kaiser Walter I

Atlantonia? Who are you referring to...? And more to the point, what comment are you referring to?

[United Republic Empire]

https://www.nationstates.net/page=WA_pa ... /council=1

Would gar 94 prevent people from having debt in the first place so they wouldn't have to go to jail ?

[Elyreia]

There are some nations by which the final metric of "citizenship" could be defined as their financial status, or lack thereof. If these cultures, which are democratic by the loose definitions that "democracies" have, believe that a person in debt (whether at all or at a certain threshold) is not a contributing member of society, and therefore should not be allowed to vote, then who are the WA to say otherwise?

In Elyreia, all persons who wish to hold office or vote must complete two years military service. Any immigrants who wish to vote in the elections of their new homes must complete this process, and all natural-born civilians must complete their two years before being granted full Citizenship. Does this at times disenfranchise people? The mentally or physically disabled who are unable to complete the two years of service are, generally speaking, disenfranchised in Elyreia with particular exemptions on a case-by-case basis (usually for physical illness or disease which prohibits completion of even the lightest of labor duties).

As such, it could be implied that if the voting rights of nations that base suffrage on wealth can have their governing frameworks challenged so directly, then any nation that has any level of voting rights (and its requirements to gain them) could also be challenged by the WA at large.

That being said, Elyreia itself does not hinder the right to vote due to debts. Only heinous crimes punishable by death will revoke an Elyreian's right to vote, or in particular crimes where the citizen in question has perform an act or acts that betray their Oath of Citizenship (to serve and aid all Elyreians for the betterment of the Principality; e.g. serial cases of committing fraud or taking advantage of the poor and dispossessed). But in this case, Elyreia chooses not to revoke voting rights, but the status of "citizen" altogether.

The same could be argued is a loophole in the current proposal: A nation no longer wants its citizens to be able to vote if they accumulate debts. The WA implies all citizens (as I'm certain the WA does not condone non-citizens voting illegally) must have a right to vote even if they are in debt. The quick solution is simply to revoke their citizenship.

I understand that the proposal is mostly a "gotcha" to prove that the proposing nation can show some brevity in their rather extensive and well-written works previously. However, while brevity is the soul of wit, it can also be the death of understanding. On one hand, I do applaud the passage given the history of the ambassador proposing it in a stark contrast to their previous works. On the other hand, I will be voting for its repeal in desires of replacement at this time.

[United Republic Empire]

There are some nations by which the final metric of "citizenship" could be defined as their financial status, or lack thereof. If these cultures, which are democratic by the loose definitions that "democracies" have, believe that a person in debt (whether at all or at a certain threshold) is not a contributing member of society, and therefore should not be allowed to vote, then who are the WA to say otherwise?

In Elyreia, all persons who wish to hold office or vote must complete two years military service. Any immigrants who wish to vote in the elections of their new homes must complete this process, and all natural-born civilians must complete their two years before being granted full Citizenship. Does this at times disenfranchise people? The mentally or physically disabled who are unable to complete the two years of service are, generally speaking, disenfranchised in Elyreia with particular exemptions on a case-by-case basis (usually for physical illness or disease which prohibits completion of even the lightest of labor duties).

As such, it could be implied that if the voting rights of nations that base suffrage on wealth can have their governing frameworks challenged so directly, then any nation that has any level of voting rights (and its requirements to gain them) could also be challenged by the WA at large.

That being said, Elyreia itself does not hinder the right to vote due to debts. Only heinous crimes punishable by death will revoke an Elyreian's right to vote, or in particular crimes where the citizen in question has perform an act or acts that betray their Oath of Citizenship (to serve and aid all Elyreians for the betterment of the Principality; e.g. serial cases of committing fraud or taking advantage of the poor and dispossessed). But in this case, Elyreia chooses not to revoke voting rights, but the status of "citizen" altogether.

The same could be argued is a loophole in the current proposal: A nation no longer wants its citizens to be able to vote if they accumulate debts. The WA implies all citizens (as I'm certain the WA does not condone non-citizens voting illegally) must have a right to vote even if they are in debt. The quick solution is simply to revoke their citizenship.

I understand that the proposal is mostly a "gotcha" to prove that the proposing nation can show some brevity in their rather extensive and well-written works previously. However, while brevity is the soul of wit, it can also be the death of understanding. On one hand, I do applaud the passage given the history of the ambassador proposing it in a stark contrast to their previous works. On the other hand, I will be voting for its repeal in desires of replacement at this time.

Did a spoiler when quoting you Elyreia to save space - I'd vote for a repeal as well. I'd like to see something more detailed and answering common concerns instead of something vague such as this proposal. When you (Elyreia) think about it, doesn't someone going to jail for debts not mean that they failed to provide funds for a service or product that they used which would in turn be considered theft in the eyes of the law. I'm just wondering your thoughts on that by chance.

[Elyreia]

Did a spoiler when quoting you Elyreia to save space - I'd vote for a repeal as well. I'd like to see something more detailed and answering common concerns instead of something vague such as this proposal. When you (Elyreia) think about it, doesn't someone going to jail for debts not mean that they failed to provide funds for a service or product that they used which would in turn be considered theft in the eyes of the law. I'm just wondering your thoughts on that by chance.

As all Elyreian Citizens must complete two years of military service and accept the Oath of Citizenship, they are all considered reservists in the Elyreian Military. As such, often punishments can be reduced to labor or service to the community, or be punitive.

In the case of finances, however, Elyreia will place responsibilities of outstanding debts onto their household should the individual fail to meet their obligations. The Household or individual may have their future payments, salaries, or incomes garnished (oftentimes collectively to share the burden across many paychecks rather than one), or the individual may volunteer in the Bykyz Azantys Elyreia (Elyreian Youth Pioneers) as a form of community service. In such a case, the Princely House will assume the debt and repay it in full on behalf of the individual, and the individual will then serve a period of time no less than three months and no longer than four years to repay the debt. They will also be provided a government-issued payment card by which they are to perform all transactions during their service, to ensure no further debts are accrued until the previous debt is paid off, and will report to a financial officer monthly to review their expenditures.

Alternatively, we do have court systems which can negotiate payment settlements.

[Mundiferrum]

There are some nations by which the final metric of "citizenship" could be defined as their financial status....

On that earlier note, see 'The Charter on Civil Rights'

'a ) All inhabitants of member states are equal in status in law and under its actions, and have the right to equal treatment and protection by the nation they inhabit or in which they are currently present...

c ) All inhabitants of member states have the right not to be and indeed must not be discriminated against on grounds including sex, race, ethnicity, nationality, skin color, language, economic or cultural background, physical or mental disability or condition, religion or belief system, sexual orientation or sexual identity, or any other arbitrarily assigned and reductive categorisation which may be used for the purposes of discrimination, except for compelling practical purposes, such as hiring only female staff to work with battered women who have sought refuge from their abusers...

a ) Unfair and unreasonable discrimination, on the grounds outlined in clause c) of article 1 of this resolution, in private employment, housing, education, employment benefits, compensations and access to services provided to the general public shall be prohibited by all member states.'

On the notes of your nation's political system, although I don't think it to be particularly illegal, it does walk a tightrope concerning three other resolutions, 'Voting Equality for Freed Inmates', 'Disabled Voters Act', and 'Military Freedom Act'.

[Elyreia]

On the notes of your nation's political system, although I don't think it to be particularly illegal, it does walk a tightrope concerning three other resolutions, 'Voting Equality for Freed Inmates', 'Disabled Voters Act', and 'Military Freedom Act'.

Inmates will be granted their voting rights immediately after returning to citizenship status. There are processes in place for those that lose citizenship due to heinous crimes that did not, for some reason, warrant a death penalty. Citizenship is not revoked upon incarceration in Elyreia. It is a right earned at the age of 20 for all native-born civilians who complete the requirements for the Oath of Citizenship, or any immigrants that complete their own 2-year processes to do the same.

Regarding disabilities, we do have methods by which to review case-by-case basis for those who wish to earn citizenship status but are unable to perform the normal duties of military service. This often includes performing duties which may substitute for military service, or performing non-combat duties during their service. Those who are paralyzed, for instance, may perform less laborious tasks in the information technology, while those who are blind may serve in sound operations. Those with mental handicaps are generally required to have members of their household be held liable for their citizenship duties, usually meaning that an assigned guardian will be held responsible for criminal activities or failure of obligations within reason.

Finally, the Military Freedom Act does not apply to the process to become a citizen - The Bykyz Azantys Elyreia is a non-combat, humanitarian force whose primary duty is serving as a Corps of Engineers and disaster recovery. Only two units in the Pioneers are military units, and civilians must become citizens before joining those two units. The majority of the 4 years spent in the Youth Pioneers (two summers of the last two years of secondary education, two additional full years of service) are trained in initial military tactics to serve as a reservist conscript force in case of invasion or national emergency, but spend most of their time performing labor for the government to help in disaster recovery (floods and landslides are common), colonization efforts (construction of infrastructure), and general government-sponsored construction or destruction events (building or maintaining roads, dams, etc). Those who qualify as conscientious objectors may serve in the more humanitarian units of the service, and will be registered in the Princely Citizenship Registry for duties related to noncombat services, such as medical or humanitarian services, and are generally exempted from conscription or mobilization.

We're not savages, we're just different.

[Mundiferrum]

I said it skirts the tightrope, although further considering the clauses I quoted from the Charter, there might be some difficulties regarding the notion of 'citizenship'. If the denial of citizenship means the denial of rights other than suffrage, then depending on a lot of those rights you may very well be non-compliant with CoCR; if it means the denial of only suffrage, then you fall foul of the Disabled Voters Act, unless you open up said military service to the disabled following a similar rubric to the Military Freedom Act.

[Elyreia]

I said it skirts the tightrope, although further considering the clauses I quoted from the Charter, there might be some difficulties regarding the notion of 'citizenship'. If the denial of citizenship means the denial of rights other than suffrage, then depending on a lot of those rights you may very well be non-compliant with CoCR; if it means the denial of only suffrage, then you fall foul of the Disabled Voters Act, unless you open up said military service to the disabled following a similar rubric to the Military Freedom Act.

Elyreia has two classes of members - Civilians, who are members of the Elyreian state who have not completed requirements for the Citizenry Oath, and Citizens, who have completed the requirements needed to be contributing members of society.

Civilians for the most part include under-aged persons, or those with severely mental and physical disabilities that preclude them from contributing to society in any way, shape, or form. For all legal intents and purposes related to diplomacy, they are the equivalent of your own Citizenry.

Citizens for Elyreia are those that have completed the requirements to be productive members of society. These persons are allowed to run for elected office, vote in elections, and acquire certain licenses, certificates, or provisions that would be unavailable to Civilians (the right to privately own firearms licenses, for instance).

This is the equivalent of someone not being of "legal age" in other nations to acquire these rights. We merely also require productive work towards the society for a minimum of two years before granting those rights (or in the case of immigrants, performing tasks to gain citizenship).

Unless you are implying that the CoCR includes that even newborn infants or illegal immigrants have a right to vote (it does say ALL inhabitants of a nation, and does not include any clauses or clarifications regarding these and many other types of persons), which would be difficult considering voting is oftentimes compulsory in some Elyreian territories.

[Mundiferrum]

I said it skirts the tightrope, although further considering the clauses I quoted from the Charter, there might be some difficulties regarding the notion of 'citizenship'. If the denial of citizenship means the denial of rights other than suffrage, then depending on a lot of those rights you may very well be non-compliant with CoCR; if it means the denial of only suffrage, then you fall foul of the Disabled Voters Act, unless you open up said military service to the disabled following a similar rubric to the Military Freedom Act.

Elyreia has two classes of members - Civilians, who are members of the Elyreian state who have not completed requirements for the Citizenry Oath, and Citizens, who have completed the requirements needed to be contributing members of society.

Civilians for the most part include under-aged persons, or those with severely mental and physical disabilities that preclude them from contributing to society in any way, shape, or form. For all legal intents and purposes related to diplomacy, they are the equivalent of your own Citizenry.

Citizens for Elyreia are those that have completed the requirements to be productive members of society. These persons are allowed to run for elected office, vote in elections, and acquire certain licenses, certificates, or provisions that would be unavailable to Civilians (the right to privately own firearms licenses, for instance).

This is the equivalent of someone not being of "legal age" in other nations to acquire these rights. We merely also require productive work towards the society for a minimum of two years before granting those rights (or in the case of immigrants, performing tasks to gain citizenship).

Unless you are implying that the CoCR includes that even newborn infants or illegal immigrants have a right to vote (it does say ALL inhabitants of a nation, and does not include any clauses or clarifications regarding these and many other types of persons), which would be difficult considering voting is oftentimes compulsory in some Elyreian territories.

I of course do not talk about immigrants or underaged; as said, this is all in consideration of the disabled. Unless alternatives exist to regular military service for the disabled (which they lrobably do), this may very well fall foul of the Disabled Voters Act.

[Elyreia]

I of course do not talk about immigrants or underaged; as said, this is all in consideration of the disabled. Unless alternatives exist to regular military service for the disabled (which they lrobably do), this may very well fall foul of the Disabled Voters Act.

Previously:

...
Regarding disabilities, we do have methods by which to review case-by-case basis for those who wish to earn citizenship status but are unable to perform the normal duties of military service. This often includes performing duties which may substitute for military service, or performing non-combat duties during their service. Those who are paralyzed, for instance, may perform less laborious tasks in the information technology, while those who are blind may serve in sound operations. Those with mental handicaps are generally required to have members of their household be held liable for their citizenship duties, usually meaning that an assigned guardian will be held responsible for criminal activities or failure of obligations within reason.
...

We have provisions available. The ultimate goal of Elyreia's government is to ensure all members who benefit also contribute - the fewer Civilians and the more Citizens there are, the further we all prosper.

Addendum: There is an exception in the island of Kastareia, under the control of House Kastareia. It's hard for the disabled to live in the frontier lands, and as such the disabled there are usually sent back to the main island to live. In such cases, the government takes on the burdens on care. This prevents the disabled from being able to vote in Kastareian elections as they are emigrated to facilities in the states of Volaria or Eastern Elyreia.

[Bears Armed]

There are some nations by which the final metric of "citizenship" could be defined as their financial status....

On that earlier note, see 'The Charter on Civil Rights'

'a ) All inhabitants of member states are equal in status in law and under its actions, and have the right to equal treatment and protection by the nation they inhabit or in which they are currently present...

c ) All inhabitants of member states have the right not to be and indeed must not be discriminated against on grounds including sex, race, ethnicity, nationality, skin color, language, economic or cultural background, physical or mental disability or condition, religion or belief system, sexual orientation or sexual identity, or any other arbitrarily assigned and reductive categorisation which may be used for the purposes of discrimination, except for compelling practical purposes, such as hiring only female staff to work with battered women who have sought refuge from their abusers...

a ) Unfair and unreasonable discrimination, on the grounds outlined in clause c) of article 1 of this resolution, in private employment, housing, education, employment benefits, compensations and access to services provided to the general public shall be prohibited by all member states.'

On the notes of your nation's political system, although I don't think it to be particularly illegal, it does walk a tightrope concerning three other resolutions, 'Voting Equality for Freed Inmates', 'Disabled Voters Act', and 'Military Freedom Act'.

OOC
According to its author's own words, in the drafting/debate thread, the COCR is only about civil rights -- c.f. the examples listed -- rather than about political rights as well. This view is supported by the choice of Category, and has some precedentary support, although that was years ago and GenSec has not yet discussed the matter.
In my opinion, if the CoCR is considered applicable to defining citizenship then logically it must also be considered applicable to defining eligibility for public office, which would effectively ban various forms of non-democratic government (e.g. hereditary rule, single-party state, theocracy, military junta)... but in that case the CoCR should have been ruled as illegal under the rule against Ideological Bans.

[Arasi Luvasa]

In my opinion, if the CoCR is considered applicable to defining citizenship then logically it must also be considered applicable to defining eligibility for public office, which would effectively ban various forms of non-democratic government (e.g. hereditary rule, single-party state, theocracy, military junta)... but in that case the CoCR should have been ruled as illegal under the rule against Ideological Bans.

That depends on what rights citizenship bestows, does it not? Is there and resolution currently that enforces what rights are available to citizens politically?

Regardless I doubt it would apply to theocracies or single-party states as joining the group would just be the method in which one signs up to be in office (I doubt any state just has every citizen in office, many countries with multiple parties would still pretty much require membership in a party).

[New Tussia]

I feel like a one-liner shouldn't really be a passed law... they're short, and provide little substance.
We, the Tussian General Assembly department, say nay to this law.

[Greater Texia]

Being that we Greater Texians are against forcing other nations to conform to foreign ideas of their governments should be run, and considering the vagueness of this resolution, in addition to there not being much if any reason for this resolution to be passed, we emphatically vote against it.

[The New California Republic]

Being that we Greater Texians are against forcing other nations to conform to foreign ideas of their governments should be run, and considering the vagueness of this resolution, in addition to there not being much if any reason for this resolution to be passed, we emphatically vote against it.

So your main opposition to this is NatSov? The World Assembly exit doors are clearly marked. Defenestrate yourself if you can't find a door.

[Falcania]

Being that we Greater Texians are against forcing other nations to conform to foreign ideas of their governments should be run, and considering the vagueness of this resolution, in addition to there not being much if any reason for this resolution to be passed, we emphatically vote against it.

So your main opposition to this is NatSov? The World Assembly exit doors are clearly marked. Defenestrate yourself if you can't find a door.

Come now, national sovereignty doesn't have to be a dirty word.

[Arasi Luvasa]

So your main opposition to this is NatSov? The World Assembly exit doors are clearly marked. Defenestrate yourself if you can't find a door.

Come now, national sovereignty doesn't have to be a dirty word.

"Here, it certainly should be. It adds nothing when it is used in a body which has it's primary purpose in infringing upon national sovereignty."

[The New California Republic]

So your main opposition to this is NatSov? The World Assembly exit doors are clearly marked. Defenestrate yourself if you can't find a door.

Come now, national sovereignty doesn't have to be a dirty word.

In the WA it is. GenSec doesn't look too kindly on repeals etc that are NatSov.

[GreaterDeseret]

Perhaps my say isn't worth much as a non-democratic nation, but I would imagine that allowing criminals of any kind to vote not only undermines the criminal justice system of all countries in the WA, but also could be a very slippery slope.

[The New California Republic]

Perhaps my say isn't worth much as a non-democratic nation, but I would imagine that allowing criminals of any kind to vote not only undermines the criminal justice system of all countries in the WA, but also could be a very slippery slope.

I don't see how, for the former or the latter...

[Wallenburg]

Perhaps my say isn't worth much as a non-democratic nation, but I would imagine that allowing criminals of any kind to vote not only undermines the criminal justice system of all countries in the WA, but also could be a very slippery slope.

Being a debtor should not be criminal, and in no modern country is it criminal.

[The Common Heritage]

STATEMENT REGARDING DEBTOR VOTING RIGHTS PROPOSAL TO THE WORLD ASSEMBLY:
Although The United Kingdom of The Common Heritage agrees with the intention of the right honorable delegates proposal, we will respectfully abstain from voting on the measure and await a more thought-out, well-planned proposal submitted to the Assembly for a vote in the near future.
We will abstain from all measures that clearly lack the effort associated with meaningful and significant reform.



The Office of the Permanent Mission of
The United Kingdom of The Common Heritage to the World Assembly

In accordance with
The Office of His Grand Majesty King Apollo I

[Dirty Americans]

*** SUDDENLY A BELL RINGS ***

Excuse me, my next batch of popcorn is ready.

*** We really need the smiley with the bag of popcorn ***

It always fascinates me how with even such a simple resolution the members can get into a red herring field of wild goose chases. Apparently the current argument of the moment is whether debt should be criminal. This resolution doesn't address that and therefore that question is moot. The resolution merely using debts as a reason to deprive someone of the vote.

Now we don't think debt should be criminal. You can't pay off your debts sitting in a dungeon. But that isn't the resolution at hand.

[Kerchistania]

Damn this sh*t is gonna pass