Assembly Speaker Eligibility Amendment

[HEM]

Assembly Speaker Eligibility Amendment

Proposed by: HEM​

Preamble

An amendment to Mandate 12 to allow for increased eligibility of citizens to serve as Speaker of the Asssembly

Section 1. Amendment

Hereby replacing the following section of Mandate 12:
​

(13) The Assembly Speaker will serve until resignation, removal from office by the Assembly or the Delegate, or automatic removal from office. The Assembly Speaker may not serve in any other office or stand for election while serving as Assembly Speaker.

with the following:
​

(13) The Assembly Speaker will serve until resignation, removal from office by the Assembly or the Delegate, or automatic removal from office. The Assembly Speaker may not serve as Prime Minister while serving as Assembly Speaker.

Hey all, as per the conversation in this thread I believe it may be useful to open up the eligibility for the Speaker role, which as it stands, is quite restrictive.

This amendment still bars the Prime Minister from serving as Speaker -- so the head of the government can't also be head of the legislature. Hopefully this helps us find a candidate interested in serving in the role.

 

[Deleted1]

Should it bar Directors too?

 

[HEM]

Should it bar Directors too?

My personal opinion is no. I think in a game with a limited player pool, separation of powers should be looked at with a very critical eye. I'm not sure what damage could be done with a Speaker who is also serving as a Director (with multiple lanes of oversight from the PM and also the Assembly).

But also, I am willing to compromise if people want to include Director too. I feel much more stronger that other junior and tangental roles definitely should not be prohibitive of serving as Speaker.

 

[New Rogernomics]

We should probably discuss whether we want full Directors to be allowed, as there could be conflicts of interest involved.

The more obvious hypothetical conflicts could include:

• Director of Shareholdership i.e. in charge of immigration
• Director of Public Relations i.e. foreign policy implications
• Director of the Regional Guard i.e. military policy

Less inclined to see any other Director role of issue though, as there isn't much that can be drawn into conflict if you are in charge of Internal Management for instance.

With the first, the potential conflict is that the same person admitting folks into Lazarus is running the assembly, and hypothetically someone could engage in what can be a technically legal, but widely disreputable, practice of vote importation, and use their knowledge and abilities as speaker to manipulate votes/elections by letting in folks they've imported at key moments.

With the second, the potential conflict is that the same person preparing Lazarene foreign policy is also running the assembly, and hypothetically they could speed up treaties they like, while frustrating ones they don't.

With the third, the potential conflict is that they are also running the military, and while this is the least likely given how the government is structured, hypothetically someone could use the position to encourage a change in R/D policy.

 

[HEM]

We should probably discuss whether we want full Directors to be allowed, as there could be conflicts of interest involved.

The more obvious hypothetical conflicts could include:

• Director of Shareholdership i.e. in charge of immigration
• Director of Public Relations i.e. foreign policy implications
• Director of the Regional Guard i.e. military policy

Less inclined to see any other Director role of issue though, as there isn't much that can be drawn into conflict if you are in charge of Internal Management for instance.

With the first, the potential conflict is that the same person admitting folks into Lazarus is running the assembly, and hypothetically someone could engage in what can be a technically legal, but widely disreputable, practice of vote importation, and use their knowledge and abilities as speaker to manipulate votes/elections by letting in folks they've imported at key moments.

With the second, the potential conflict is that the same person preparing Lazarene foreign policy is also running the assembly, and hypothetically they could speed up treaties they like, while frustrating ones they don't.

With the third, the potential conflict is that they are also running the military, and while this is the least likely given how the government is structured, hypothetically someone could use the position to encourage a change in R/D policy.

I don't dispute that in any occasion where there are people holding multiple roles, there is a potential for abuse of power. I think it is incredibly helpful you've laid all these out, but in my view, none of the risks here outweigh the benefit it allowing our more active citizens to serve "double duty" in roles effectively.

The Speaker cannot undertake most of these potential actions unilaterally or without "check" from the Assembly, and to be frank, any of the scenarios could also occur if the Director were simply friends or in cahoots with another Director. If someone where determined to be subversive (and i hope they never will be!) I don't think a prohibition of holding multiple offices here would do much to frustrate that agenda.

 

[New Rogernomics]

I don't dispute that in any occasion where there are people holding multiple roles, there is a potential for abuse of power. I think it is incredibly helpful you've laid all these out, but in my view, none of the risks here outweigh the benefit it allowing our more active citizens to serve "double duty" in roles effectively.

The Speaker cannot undertake most of these potential actions unilaterally or without "check" from the Assembly, and to be frank, any of the scenarios could also occur if the Director were simply friends or in cahoots with another Director. If someone where determined to be subversive (and i hope they never will be!) I don't think a prohibition of holding multiple offices here would do much to frustrate that agenda.

Well, if the rest are okay with it and have no objections we could take this vote.

The last thing I would raise is that conflicts of interests would have to be resolved either through a recall or a CLS vote unless mentioned otherwise in the amendment, as I don't think the court could rule on a situation created by an Assembly Speaker that is technically legal, but extremely disreputable. So practically if a conflict does occur, effectively the region would only have the choice of a recall or outright banning the Assembly Speaker from the region.

Though this process makes me think we need another amendment to streamline things, so that it is clearly stated that an Assembly Speaker can be put forward the same way as a Director, and be able to be appointed and do their duties on a temporary basis before they are voted on by the assembly. Likewise it would resolve the situation that could arise from a Speaker being recalled and the Assembly grinding to a halt as a result. So we could save time by adding that into this amendment as well:

(13) The Assembly Speaker will serve until resignation, removal from office by the Assembly or the Delegate, or automatic removal from office. The Assembly Speaker may not serve as Prime Minister while serving as Assembly Speaker. They may serve on a provisional basis unless and until their confirmations are rejected by the Assembly.

 

[Apatosaurus]

For for for.

Anyway, I think the only restriction should be that the Speaker cannot hold any other public office/Directorship within Lazarus, but regardless, there's no reason that holding any office outside of Laz should stop you from being Speaker here.

 

[Frankender]

Can we get a finalized draft of this amendment so we can put it up for vote?

My suggested changes from New Rogernomic's version are highlighted in red.

(13) The Assembly Speaker will serve until resignation, removal from office by the Assembly or the Delegate, or automatic removal from office. The Assembly Speaker may not serve as Prime Minister while serving as Assembly Speaker. If there is no current Speaker, once nominated by the Delegate, the nominee may serve on a provisional basis unless and until their confirmations are rejected by the Assembly.

 

[moe]

I would be in favor of this amendment

 

[HEM]

I also approve the amendment!

 

[Apatosaurus]

Thirded.

 

[New Rogernomics]

I also approve the amendment!

Are you going to update the text, or do you want to run with as is?

 

[Domais]

"I'm in favor of this" or "I approve of this" are not valid motions to vote. If this is intended to be a motion to vote please use "I motion to vote" and "I second".

 

[Deleted1]

Because of the reasons outlined by Roger, I won't support a proposal that allows the Speaker to also be a Director.

 

[Apatosaurus]

I motion this to vote.

 

[Enigma]

I second the motion to vote.

 

[Frankender]

Only HEM can motion this to vote

 

[New Rogernomics]

Only HEM can motion this to vote

Actually anyone can motion something to vote if the original author has not been online for more than seven days.

(2) In order for a proposal to be brought to vote, a citizen eligible to vote on that proposal must make a motion to vote, and another such citizen must second the motion. A motion to vote may only be made by the initial author of a proposal unless the initial author is no longer a citizen or has not posted on the off-site regional forum for more than seven days without posting a leave of absence and has not logged on to their on-site account for more than seven days.

Link: https://nslazarus.com/forum/index.php?threads/1815/

 

[Enigma]

Only HEM can motion this to vote

"A motion to vote may only be made by the initial author of a proposal unless the initial author is no longer a citizen or has not posted on the off-site regional forum for more than seven days without posting a leave of absence and has not logged on to their on-site account for more than seven days."

HEM has not posted on this forum within the last 7 days and has not logged into their Lazarus nation within the last 7 days. Therefore, Python's motion should be fully legal, unless I am mistaken?

Edit: Whoops, now I see Roger already responded.

 

[New Rogernomics]

"A motion to vote may only be made by the initial author of a proposal unless the initial author is no longer a citizen or has not posted on the off-site regional forum for more than seven days without posting a leave of absence and has not logged on to their on-site account for more than seven days."

HEM has not posted on this forum within the last 7 days and has not logged into their Lazarus nation within the last 7 days. Therefore, Python's motion should be fully legal, unless I am mistaken?

Yep. That's correct.