Proposal [Proposal] Elected Ministries Amendment (2022)

[New Rogernomics]

Elected Ministries Amendment (2022)

Proposed by: @New Rogernomics
​

Section 1. Section 4 of the Mandate, Establishment of the Cabinet, currently reads:

IV. Cabinet of Lazarus

Establishment of the Cabinet

(4) The Prime Minister will set the course of the Cabinet with such ministries, programs, and activities as they determine are beneficial for Lazarus.

(5) The Prime Minister may issue executive directives to set public policy for executive ministries, programs, and activities. Such directives will remain in effect unless rescinded by the Prime Minister who issued them or a subsequent Prime Minister. Such directives may also be amended by the Prime Minister who issued them or a subsequent Prime Minister.

(6) The Prime Minister may appoint Cabinet Ministers to assist with executive ministries, programs and activities, and must fill any ministries mandated by law. Appointment of Cabinet Ministers will be subject to confirmation by 50%+1 vote of the Assembly.

(7) Cabinet Ministers will serve until the end of the Prime Minister's term or until resignation, removal from office by the Assembly or the Prime Minister, or automatic removal from office.

(8) The Prime Minister may provide for the appointment and removal of Cabinet deputies.

Section 1. Section 4 of the Mandate, Establishment of the Cabinet shall be amended to include:

IV. Cabinet of Lazarus

Establishment of the Cabinet

(6) The Prime Minister may appoint Cabinet Ministers to assist with executive ministries not subject to a regional election, and programs and activities. Appointment of Cabinet Ministers will be subject to confirmation by 50%+1 vote of the Assembly.

(7) Cabinet Ministers will serve until the next Prime Minister's term, if not subject to a regional election, or until resignation, removal from office by the Assembly or the Prime Minister, or automatic removal from office.

(8) Cabinet Ministers subject to regional election shall be elected by majority instant-runoff vote for a three-month term. Elections shall be undertaken by the Assembly. Procedure for elections will be defined in law.

(9) The Prime Minister may provide for the appointment and removal of Cabinet deputies.

Original discussion is here: https://nslazarus.com/forum/index.php?threads/3911/

 

[New Rogernomics]

It is better to take this to vote, once the proposal is ready, and have this fail or pass, as that sets the tone for the political future of Lazarus, whether we want the status quo forever, or to switch things up.

I think that it would be a big mistake to fear political change, rather than to embrace new ideas and new challenges.

But this is not a dictatorship, and if the region truly believes no changes are needed, even if this is contradicted by inactivity and a lack of enthusiasm to hold positions, then that is their decision.

It seems obvious that the opposition is beyond just this amendment, and that the region wants a referendum on political change itself.

Effectively the question really is:

Should the PM be the only elected position in the entire region, or should there be low-level elections that people can engage with and get involved in, before aspiring higher?

Note: This amendment would allow for the election of Ministers, but not define which Ministries will be subject to election.

 

[McChimp]

Nay. This proposal degrades the PM's control of their cabinet and would weaken future governments. I also doubt that the Assembly will stay engaged with many more elections than it already conducts.

 

[New Rogernomics]

Nay. This proposal degrades the PM's control of their cabinet and would weaken future governments. I also doubt that the Assembly will stay engaged with many more elections than it already conducts.

My issues with the government are that it lacks competitiveness for positions, and no one is really that inspired to become a Minister, as it just handed by the PM out versus earned through an election process.

I still don't think the head of government structure works, as they have no large support structure.

I say that because in other regions there are elected staffers, not just appointments, and the PM is just one of several elected positions. Then there are a lot of appointed staffers under them.

Departments are under-staffed, and that isn't going to change without some sort of shake up, which I don't really see happening unless people are inspired beyond just the job being there.

Retainment of talent is another issue, as once they've been PM, there is nothing else below that beyond sucking up to the next PM to try and get an appointment.

We don't have an upper house, which is what is used in a lot of regions to retain talent, and a civil society of sorts, as well as keep some old guard to carry the torch.

Nor do we have any formal structure like honors and really much to reward anyone beyond CLS membership, and should we really be handing security positions out just for that, probably not.

 

[thechurchofsatan]

Nay. This proposal degrades the PM's control of their cabinet and would weaken future governments. I also doubt that the Assembly will stay engaged with many more elections than it already conducts.

The current system, with regards to Ministers, weakens the region. It reduces activity, restricts individual growth among citizens, and discourages participation in the government.

The current system isn't working. A change is necessary in order for the region to prosper.

EDIT: You may find it funny, Chanku, but the state of the region speaks for itself. The only GCR less active than Lazarus is Balder. That's a very low bar to set too.

 

[New Rogernomics]

The current system, with regards to Ministers, weakens the region. It reduces activity, restricts individual growth among citizens, and discourages participation in the government.

The current system isn't working. A change is necessary in order for the region to prosper.

EDIT: You may find it funny, Chanku, but the state of the region speaks for itself. The only GCR less active than Lazarus is Balder. That's a very low bar to set too.

Given what happened here: https://nslazarus.com/forum/index.php?threads/3911/page-2

Should we even continue debating this, as in a few minutes, the region has gone from an IC debate to OOC.

Lazarus has much bigger problems, if this basic debate over whether Ministers being elected, which at worst might take power away from the PM, gets attacked like if it was the opener to regional collapse.

Lazarus isn't going to die whether this passes or fails.

 

[thechurchofsatan]

Given what happened here: https://nslazarus.com/forum/index.php?threads/3911/page-2

Should we even continue debating this, as in a few minutes, the region has gone from an IC debate to OOC.

Lazarus has much bigger problems, if this basic debate over whether Ministers being elected, which at worst might take power away from the PM, gets attacked like if it was the opener to regional collapse.

Lazarus isn't going to die whether this passes or fails.

True. The doomsaying is quite irrational. The fact of the matter is, the system isn't working right now. It is detrimental to Lazarus' prosperity. So why defend a system that has proven to be ineffective? What value does it have? What good does it do? What is the point of it if not to simply be a means to hoard power for one position? And if that is the case, is it worth protecting?

 

[New Rogernomics]

True. The doomsaying is quite irrational. The fact of the matter is, the system isn't working right now. It is detrimental to Lazarus' prosperity. So why defend a system that has proven to be ineffective? What value does it have? What good does it do? What is the point of it if not to simply be a means to hoard power for one position? And if that is the case, is it worth protecting?

This was part of the reason I created the Reform Club server, as folks couldn't keep debates in the context of what if this was done, and they'd automatically assume that every proposal in the assembly has to be tried out - or that a slight possibility of a proposal passing is a threat.

I am sure if I held a debate on the Delegacy, or the Courts, or really anything else, I couldn't have a nice debate on anything at this point.

I don't honestly approach debates with the position that any point of view is "wrong", and instead believe that there are only different approaches to an issue.

Hence why I am more than happy to discuss all aspects of an issue, including that what I disagree with, and be patient. But that can't happen if the response is basically, "you are going to destroy the region".

 

[Frankender]

Sounds like the assertion in this proposal is that the PM is the highest position we have, so instead of making the PM stronger, we need to make other positions in the government stronger so they are more attractive

My school of thought is that the problem is the PM lacking enough power to make an impact, and electing ministers only makes the position weaker. With all due respect to our current PM candidates, it seems the position isn’t very sought after


Is the solution to weaken the head of state or strengthen it? Does the head of state not drive activity and prosperity? Is that not the purpose of our head of state?

 

[Wang Yao]

Sounds like the assertion in this proposal is that the PM is the highest position we have, so instead of making the PM stronger, we need to make other positions in the government stronger so they are more attractive

My school of thought is that the problem is the PM lacking enough power to make an impact, and electing ministers only makes the position weaker. With all due respect to our current PM candidates, it seems the position isn’t very sought after

Is the solution to weaken the head of state or strengthen it? Does the head of state not drive activity and prosperity? Is that not the purpose of our head of state?

I agree that the PM position doesn't seem to have as much attractiveness as it surely should but from my experience, it's also the case for Minister positions.

However, while I myself to tend to prefer promotions in departments based on merits (Probably due to me being more used to Meritocratic regions), I believe there is a major problem with having only the Prime Minister being elected in a Democracy in the sense that it is probably the Government position with the most pressure and responsibilities. Thus it's kinda scary for a newcomer, and even sometimes for experienced members, to run for a such an important position.

So, while a Minister election would be problematic for some Ministries (Notably FA or LazGuard), perhaps an election for Internal Affairs, or even a Cards department, leadership could offer more openings for Lazarenes wanting to get involved and to run but who don't think they're fit or available for leading an entire government. Of course the elected Minister would have to work alongside the Prime Minister in a constructive way though.

I'd be curious to hear opinions on that issue, so I'm looking forward for this discussion among citizens to continue.

 

[Frankender]

People can already reach out to the PM to request leadership of a ministry such as cards as you are describing. Not sure why it has to be elected

 

[Wang Yao]

People can already reach out to the PM to request leadership of a ministry such as cards as you are describing. Not sure why it has to be elected

I wasn't referring about asking for a new department, I was citing examples of existing (Internal Affairs) or potential (Cards Guild if it would become a department of its own) departments that would in my opinion be fit for an electoral Minister position.

The point of an election as I see it for these departments would be that instead of, as it happens most of the time, having the PM trying to reach out to the most qualified or enthusiastic person, they would actually have to work on a platform in which they could work on their ideas for the department. I think a problem is that with appointed Ministers for this type of departments, you can often get people who are quite enthusiastic to work in that position but they don't think enough about what concrete plans they would want to push for and focus on once appointed. So it's notably the work and thinking they would have to put into explaining what their plans are for the Department and the competition of ideas that I think could be positive.

(That and obviously, lower barrier of entry for newcomers who want to be part of an election)

 

[Ellenburg#8639]

I don't believe that more elections are a bad thing. I have seen elsewhere it promotes activity which is something that is always good. It would take away from the PM position but the long-term effects would be better for the activity and functionality of the region as a whole.