Opinion Piece: Stay the Course

Pierce

Vice President
Vice President
Cabinet
Discord Moderator
#1



Opinion Piece: Stay the Course
By Pierce







After days of debate over the executive-appointed senators provisions in the Lazarus Project proposal, a majority of the voters in the Constitutional Convention have voted against the idea. It’s clear that Senators Prim and Kari aren’t pleased with the results. As a result, Senator Kari has motioned to table the proposal in the Senate and requested the Convention Chair to remove it from the floor. This sets the region back to square one in the reform efforts that have already been ongoing since the summer of 2017.

Entrenching himself with Senator Kari, Senator Prim declared on the floor that eliminating the provision in question “diverges enough from our current structure for me to support it”, and wishes to move back to discussing the unicameral proposal. He also asserts that the provision was included when the Convention voted for the Lazarus Project and believes that eliminating it will make the reforms “watered down” as reason not to eliminate the provision.

Let us pause and take a breath. As far as how far the reform goes, everything else in the Lazarus Project is quite different from the system we have now (whether we keep the executive-appointed senators provision or not). The Project constitutes a full bicameral legislature with a split executive that has new dynamics in relation to each other. Hardly watered down, I'd say. The behavior displayed mirrors that of the Brexiteers in RL Britain, condemning Theresa May’s deals with the EU as a "watered down Brexit". The problem that many people- reformists and moderates alike- had with the idea of the provision was that in a Republic, the representatives of a legislature derive their mandate from the electorate, not the President or Prime Minister. To understand this concept, we may read the words of one of the founding fathers of the RL world’s oldest republic, James Madison, in Federalist Papers No. 51:

“In order to lay a due foundation for that separate and distinct exercise of the different powers of government, which to a certain extent is admitted on all hands to be essential to the preservation of liberty, it is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the others

It is equally evident, that the members of each department should be as little dependent as possible on those of the others, for the emoluments annexed to their offices. Were the executive magistrate, or the judges, not independent of the legislature in this particular, their independence in every other would be merely nominal. But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.”

To summarize that quote, the branches of government should indeed be able to check one another within reason but when those checks become unbalanced, it enables one branch to have more influence over another than what is reasonable; the membership of the legislature must be independent from the authority of the executive in order to duly represent the people in the halls of government to serve as a check by the governed upon the government. I could go on about the fundamentals of a republican model of government, but I will not bore the readers any further with analyses of the Federalist Papers.

The most important problem I see here is that the good Senators are attempting to shut down the discussion over a single issue even though the majority of the Convention wants to eliminate the provision. I have high respect for the members of my own party, but I fear they have allowed their own views to cloud their judgement on what is best for the region per the will of the governed. Senator Prim may argue that the provision was already in place when the Convention forwarded the Project, but passage of the general proposal does not mean that the same proposal is immune to necessary revisions and edits to ensure quality and proper governance that uphold the fundamental standards of a republican style of government that we as a region hold dear. I have high respect for the Senators, but by entrenching themselves in this manner, this debate over reform is no longer a debate between the reformists, the moderates, and the anti-reformists. If history in this region and in real life have demonstrated anything, it’s that establishing constitutional law requires being open to listening to views different than yours and to compromise. Both sides have already given ground, but we cannot allow a single nonpartisan issue to prevent the region from moving on with an effort that has been going on for months. As a reformist myself, I find the constant demonization of the moderate voters to be unhealthy and destructive to the spirit of a political region like ours. As we debate these issues, we should be careful to avoid dismissing and equating the moderate views as “anti-reformist”. The only way we can endeavor to form that more perfect Republic in a proper Constitution is to listen to one another. The type of strategy from our more spirited Senators poorly represents the rest of us and our credibility as the leading voice in the region.

Any reform proposal that does not abide by the will of the people through the Convention is not a legitimate proposal. In order to keep their promises to the citizens of Europeia that voted them in and the confidence of the region, the Senate must stay the course and pass the reforms that the Convention wants rather than stagnating the efforts by the whims of two pertinacious Senators.
 

Lethen

oh hi lethen
Forum Administrator
Supreme Chancellor
#3
Interesting read; I actually didn't realize the proposal had been tabled in the Senate. That being said, Senator Kari herself said that a primary motivator for tabling the proposal is to go back to the drawing board and flesh out an entirely new proposal with (even more) broad support. Maybe I missed it, but that should have been included in the article?

Someone finally gets it.
Because you're so misunderstood :rolleyes:
 

GraVandius

Know-er of Things
Discord Moderator
#4
An excellent piece that was very timely and incredibly well put together. The all or nothing approach in quite frankly insane and wholly unproductive. The moderate reformists have the best approach to reform and if you share those ideas I would encourage to check out the EPP a newly formed party on moderate principles. Apply Here
 

Pierce

Vice President
Vice President
Cabinet
Discord Moderator
#5
There was a motion to table, but the entire Senate hasn't voted in favor yet. I suspect that they want to buy more time to convince the convention for the executive.

Senator Kari:
I oppose the continued pursuit of this without the appointed senators as without the interplay they offer it is a fundamentally different proposal as the one that passed the convention.
From what I can see, Senator Kari dropped this after the Convention voted against the provision in question, and Senator Prim wants to go back to discussing the unicameral proposal. The executive appointing senators is hardly a positive central and key reform portion in the dynamics between the executive and the legislature, as the rest of the proposal already has significant strides from the current system.

That being said, I hope the rest of the Senators reject the motion to table.

Also a disclaimer: I am by no means a moderate reformer, I just don't think this is a zero sum game
 

Kari

Tantum Kari pro se dicere potest.
Senator
#6
I stated, clearly, in the Senate why I want it tabled:

I oppose the continued pursuit of this without the appointed senators as without the interplay they offer it is a fundamentally different proposal as the one that passed the convention.

I propose that we move back to the convention. Give 7-10 days for an entirely new group of proposals (incl. re-submissions.) Hold a vote on them where everyone gets 2 votes, everything that gets over 50% goes through to a second round to be held the following day with one vote per person, whatever wins the second round is what we go with.
I am going to be clear; I am not going to support any version of The Lazarus Project, as it is currently before the Senate, from this point on.

I do however want to continue the reform discussions and I think going back to the convention and having a 2 stage vote in it to get one definitively supported proposal that can be worked on, warts and all, to completion. TLP is not that proposal in its current state, nor will it be with the removal of the appointed Senators.

I firmly believe it would be best for the region at this point to move to a set in stone 7-10 days for proposals to be submitted with a 24hr vote at the end where everyone gets 2 votes to split between all the proposals, all the proposals with over X% (33-50%) move to the second 24hr vote where everyone has only one vote and a proposal advances and is chosen as the package we move forward with, in full, for better or worse.

The Split Execs. bill introduced in the Senate is because it was 1) the only thing passed by the convention in its initial state and 2) has been in every proposal introduced since and is (near as makes no difference) universally agreed upon.
 

Pierce

Vice President
Vice President
Cabinet
Discord Moderator
#7
Or the Senate could move forward with the Project with the minor revisions included to advance back to Constitutional Convention for discussion and/or voting since the Convention has voted on the particular provision that triggered this attempted setback?
 

Whitmark

Deputy Minister
Deputy Minister
#8
I agree with Pierce.

I think the region wants reform and the Senate must deliver. It’s unfair that a single and small proposal like the appointed senators, creates this mess. It’s unwise to request the tabling of the Lazarus proposal because a what a poll says.

Senate must continue with the reform process, address and compromise whenever needed. It’s outrageous and very unwise to throw everything to the garbage just because a piece of the reform is unpopular. We need to compromise and earnest effort to find ways to come together to find the necessary compromises to bridge our differences and help restore our prosperity, and leave the future generations of Europeians a stronger, better region than we found.
 

Deepest House

Vice Chancellor
Vice Chancellor
Discord Moderator
#9
It is unfortunate that these two senators have decided to derail and attempt to delay the entire reform process by holding out over an extremely unpopular provision.

Indeed, there was never an expectation that the senate wouldn't do additional work on these proposals. The citizens have given broad guidance to the senators to complete the reform task, and these two senators have a responsibility to act in good faith and continue the debate and discussion. That is their duty as en elected official, and that duty is compounded by the expectations of the current senate.

At the time of the vote, HEM said "I think that in the next step, the Senate will have liberal flexibility to adjust proposals based on how the public discussions unfold. We aren't married to the specific minutia of each specific proposal."

Or are we?

Well, we got to that next step and these two senators together decided that wasn't good enough for them, and despite the fact that 75 percent of the region doesn't want appointed senators and that there was an expectation to adjust proposals based on public discussions, they were going to effectively (though perhaps not intentionally) serve more as obstructionists to reform rather than the reformers they claim to be.

I hope the rest of the senate will dismiss their attempts to delay further debate and discussion and continue the reform process. Make them vote against reform publicly.
 

Johnny Costello

Probably the worst CA Chairman ever.
Deputy Minister
#11
Sadly our forum software only allows us to like a news article. It's a pity I can't anally rim it.

Great job Pierce. Fucking stellar.
Ima need you to chill out sonic. 😂

But on a real note. I think the biggest backlash in Moderates ideals is this....

Looks like the anti-reformers are getting their wish. Support the reform that changes the least amount possible and then water it down some more until it's basically changing nothing.

Going full psychotic flip, and I can catch the tone used here, this wasn't typed out in calm mind-set. This is not how Senators need be acting.

To that I say
 

Darcness

I wield the wrench
Forum Administrator
Associate Justice
#12
Ima need you to chill out sonic. 😂

But on a real note. I think the biggest backlash in Moderates ideals is this....

Looks like the anti-reformers are getting their wish. Support the reform that changes the least amount possible and then water it down some more until it's basically changing nothing.

Going full psychotic flip, and I can catch the tone used here, this wasn't typed out in calm mind-set. This is not how Senators need be acting.

To that I say
People seem to forget the very first thing Prim did in Europeia that was noteworthy: propose 3 different drastic changes to the region in the CA. One of them actually made it (the Senate Size voting we do today), but only after Drecq radically altered it. These weren't the actions of someone that became a member of our region, understood our culture, and then tried to solve a problem. These are the actions of someone that just wanted to muck with things.

I think JayDee called it right. Prim just wants change for the sake of change, and wants his name on it.
 

Lethen

oh hi lethen
Forum Administrator
Supreme Chancellor
#13
Going full psychotic flip, and I can catch the tone used here, this wasn't typed out in calm mind-set. This is not how Senators need be acting
Full psychotic flip? Don't you think you're being just a bit hyperbolic and dramatic? :unsure:

Also @Darcness that behavior could just as easily be read as an outsider coming in; recognizing the deficiencies that we have a hard time seeing or fixing ourselves; and offering ideas to fix them. It's disingenuous to flatly say it's change for the sake of change and done with personal aggrandizement in mind.

But what if it is? Do you think everything I've done for Europeia was done in a vacuum? I've made it clear since I first joined that most - nearly all - of my contributions have been done so I could make a name for myself and have a hand in molding a region into something great.

If that desire happens to coincide with many peoples' ideas of what makes Europeia great, why is that a problem? Aren't we all doing this for some sense of self-fulfillment and approval or respect from others?
 
Last edited:

Sopo

sloth
Forum Administrator
President
#14
Full psychotic flip? Don't you think you're being just a bit hyperbolic and dramatic? :unsure:

Also @Darcness that behavior could just as easily be read as an outsider coming in; recognizing the deficiencies that we have a far time seeing or fixing ourselves; and offering ideas to fix them. It's disingenuous to flatly say it's change for the sake of change and done with personal aggrandizement in mind.

But what if it is? Do you think everything I've done for Europeia was done in a vacuum? I've made it clear since I first joined that most - nearly all - of my contributions have been done so I could make a name for myself and have a hand in molding a region into something great.

If that desire happens to coincide with many peoples' ideas of what makes Europeia great, why is that a problem? Aren't we all doing this for some sense of self-fulfillment and approval or respect from others?
Agree.

I support legislative reform, and I don't think the Lazarus Project without appointed senators is sufficient legislative reform. The appointed senators add a layer of political intrigue to a relatively mundane upper house in a relatively mundane bicameral system. I'm not interested in the proposal without that aspect. Given current activity levels, I would rather keep the current system with some minor changes to the Senate and CA than move to a more traditional bicameral system that we probably don't have the activity to support.

However, more than anything else, I support the executive split. I think that's the real linchpin to future success in the executive. Legislative reform is secondary, and a half-baked, uninspired legislative reform is not something I think we should be pushing through in the name of compromise.
 

Johnny Costello

Probably the worst CA Chairman ever.
Deputy Minister
#15
Full psychotic flip? Don't you think you're being just a bit hyperbolic and dramatic? :unsure:
Wait? are you saying that.....
Looks like the anti-reformers are getting their wish. Support the reform that changes the least amount possible and then water it down some more until it's basically changing nothing.
isn't goind on a full psychotic flip but this.....
This is not how Senators need be acting
is somehow dramatic?

mate what the actual sh1t

allow me to be a bit dramatic here. When we have a Senator go kamikazi on the debate between what shapes the region for the next few years its perfectly cool but when a kinda newcomer guy says he doesn't agree with the baby like behavior and actual Donald Trump Impression. the newcomer is dramatic? Ima need this logic spelled out in 2nd grader reading level cause that's some next level rocket crap if i do say so myself.

bro wow.
 

Sopo

sloth
Forum Administrator
President
#17
Wait? are you saying that.....
Looks like the anti-reformers are getting their wish. Support the reform that changes the least amount possible and then water it down some more until it's basically changing nothing.
isn't goind on a full psychotic flip but this.....
This is not how Senators need be acting
is somehow dramatic?

mate what the actual sh1t

allow me to be a bit dramatic here. When we have a Senator go kamikazi on the debate between what shapes the region for the next few years its perfectly cool but when a kinda newcomer guy says he doesn't agree with the baby like behavior and actual Donald Trump Impression. the newcomer is dramatic? Ima need this logic spelled out in 2nd grader reading level cause that's some next level rocket crap if i do say so myself.

bro wow.
Sorry, I don't understand any of this. I'm not sure "psychotic" is actually the word you want.
 

Johnny Costello

Probably the worst CA Chairman ever.
Deputy Minister
#18
Psychotic is the word.
adjective
1.
of, denoting, or suffering from a psychosis.
Psychosis may occur as a result of a psychiatric illness like schizophrenia. In other instances, it may be caused by a health condition, medications, or drug use.
Possible symptoms include delusions, hallucinations, talking incoherently, and agitation. The person with the condition usually isn't aware of his or her behavior.
Treatment may include medication and talk therapy.
 

HEM

lightpink
Forum Administrator
Senate Speaker
Cabinet
#19
People seem to forget the very first thing Prim did in Europeia that was noteworthy: propose 3 different drastic changes to the region in the CA. One of them actually made it (the Senate Size voting we do today), but only after Drecq radically altered it. These weren't the actions of someone that became a member of our region, understood our culture, and then tried to solve a problem. These are the actions of someone that just wanted to muck with things.

I think JayDee called it right. Prim just wants change for the sake of change, and wants his name on it.
Uh, this is really a reach.

I've also fought for drastic reform in our region since 2012. You want to call into question my motives too bb?
 

Sopo

sloth
Forum Administrator
President
#20
Psychotic is the word.
adjective
1.
of, denoting, or suffering from a psychosis.
Psychosis may occur as a result of a psychiatric illness like schizophrenia. In other instances, it may be caused by a health condition, medications, or drug use.
Possible symptoms include delusions, hallucinations, talking incoherently, and agitation. The person with the condition usually isn't aware of his or her behavior.
Treatment may include medication and talk therapy.
Then this doesn't make sense at all. Kari and Prim's point is that the Lazarus Project is not enough reform, so they won't support it. They still support legislative reform.
 
Top