How about some actual discussion on that referendum amendment, eh?

Sadly no, remember I'm a Canadian socialist. No applause has been forthcoming so far.

Well, I'll make sure to have my pre-paid return ticket and a zippo lighter (just in case I need to build a quickie torch for protection) close at hand.

Thanks for having a sense of humor. It's really a great place.

~Ulrika~

Doesn't Frankenstein turn round and drown the cute little girl in the lake right after that?

Shhh.

~Ulrika~

There's the microplot option, too. It's right here.

Which would, of course, allow you the same public access to the public shop as anyone else.

/me peeks over the ledge nervously and says.... "Is it safe to have an opinion again?"

Only if you repent of your sins.

Lord, please forgive me of my sins. I am truly sorry for my transgressions. Amen!

You can call me Kendra.

Kendra

May I kindly remind everybody that this is still the discussion thread on the referendum amendment?

I'd like it passed as is. This, or any other bill can always be deleted by the SC moderators before anyone can read it. Just kidding.

I see the constitution as a living document that must be amendable to change with the times. I also firmly feel that the citizenry owns the constitution. I also believe in testing, just like prohibition was eventually rejected, these reforms might be rolled back. Let's try them out.

I honestly don't think we're proposing undoable Nazi like reforms to consolidate power. Referenda work in many jurisdictions. I'm a Quebec Federalist, I oughta know.

I see the constitution as a living document that must be amendable to change with the times. I also firmly feel that the citizenry owns the constitution. I don't believe in casually testing amendments that could open up the possibility of the Bill of Rights being overridden. It would be an embarassment if this project opened itself up to that potential and a disaster to the project if an amendment which negated part of the Bill of Rights were passed.

~Ulrika~

I would certainly fully agree with this. Would not the SC veto such an amendment?

This is precisely why I'm against referendum votes. The Constitution must be re-interpreted by new generations to fit the needs of the time as well as the spirit of the original intent. This is why we even have an SC. To interpret the Constitution in the light of the times.

Passing needless amendments that are constantly changed or over-ridden by succsessive iterations of government administrations reduces the Constitution to a patchwork of post-it notes and takes it out of the hands of the citizenry despite the illusion that referendum votes grant.

It is tempting to allow the current populace to vote in referendum on constitutional amendmants, but it removes the Constitution from being owned by future generations of citizenry.

Turning Representative Government away from administrative duty in response to the needs of the people and into an amendment factory for popularist support is in my view short sighted and irresponsible.

I kinda like Patrokulus (post #62). It's just like now, but it'll slow down the RA and make sure the people are "on board". At election time, up or down referendum vote on each amendment lettered A-Z. Referendum text on the wiki.

With Patrokulus, you can pass amendments only once per term (every six months) at the end of term. It's also a vote of confidence for the RA and discourages the "amendment factory". If the DPU were to put 25 amendments up for referendum, and each DPU supporter found one of these truly objectionable, the amendments might pass, but the DPU would get voted out. In an oligarchic grab with 4 RA members and 2 on the SC. The final referendum guards against such a RA power grab.

Keep in mind that these are amendments that the SC has ruled (as always) as kosher. Referenda work fine in Canada. Quebec takes it to the people whether the Canadian supreme court rules the measure valid or not! I prefer Patrokulus to the way things are done in Canada right now because there's less mob rule! Canada's constitution was heavily modified in the early years after confederation (1867) to accomodate new provinces.

This (referendum) PITA and time constraint will ensure that the vast majority of legislation is passed as simple bills to be put into the NB code.

I know you guys don't seem big on referenda. I'm not sure I understand the objection to Patrokulus #62. I'm as curious as the rest about the SC ruling on impeachment procedures.

Patrokolus #62 is the only version I've seen that I would support.

Would you be ok with my elaboration on referendum mechanism? i.e.:

Referendum held optionally once at the end of RA term.
Each clear, SC approved referendum question passes with a 50% +1 yes vote.
Questions lettered A-Z (max 26? ) have full text on the wiki.

I know some insisted on a block vote.
Claude didn't dig the timing of it, but logistically if the populace is voting anyway, it's a good time to do it.

Yes, Pel --I do agree with that.

If people are happy with this and if we are happy with the SC's ruling on impeachment procedures, we might see the end of the tunnel here. I'd add Claude's requirement of 60%+1 turnout, no one likes the result of a referendum with 2 votes cast.

Claude, if it were possible to block impeach a tyrannical SC would you be ok with my elaboration on Patrokulus #62? What kinds of impeachment mechanisms would you see as able to stop a tyrannical SC? I realize the stumbling block of not getting rid of the SC veto. Not sure there's any way to sidestep that.

Kendra are you ok with the "fast track" portion where (post #1 other thread) unanimity of all 3 branches can schedule a referendum outside of the election?

Here's Patrokulus #62, item 2)


Here's Claude's Fast Track (which I see as an emergency measure, because the PITA of holding a referendum at another time would be for some glaring immediate threat/remedy):

The Fast Track Bill would have my support as well.

Thank you for the opportunity of attending the Representative Assembly meeting yesterday, it was really interesting to see Neualtenburg democracy in action. I'm sorry I couldn't stay til the end, it was way past my bedtime!

It seems like a consensus is forming around the proposal Pelanor has outlined. What happens next? Will this be considered at a future RA meeting?

BTW, I've contacted Sudane to say I'd like to buy a plot and have a stake in N'burg. I'm looking forward to meeting more of you and participating in N'burg's democracy!

Dude that's totally your idea. I'm getting T-Shirts printed that say "Patroklus '62!". Welcome to town!

Of course we haven't heard from others yet, perhaps they are waiting for the SC ruling/opinion...

I'm waiting for the results of the SC hearing today to see if I'm still a citizen, m'self.

But assuming I am, and I see no reason not to, I think this is a workable compromise.