Districts and Regions Maps

[7,052,770]

C;mon!  We all agreed to a map...no need to change it!

[Niles Caulder]

My proposal-It includes a lot of reshuffling, but it is geographically fair, and as population-fair as possible, imho.

Out of the ones I've seen so far, I like this one the best--the Regional characters are as consistent as I've seen them yet.
Of course that's just one voter's opinion.

Senator Harry:  agreeing to a map wasn't the problem; agreeing to an unconstitutional map was.  Nothing short of a constitutional ammendment or the Supreme Court declaring changes in the laws of mathematics will save the existing map.  So if the Senate is going to HAVE to go to effort of a constitutional ammendment in order to get out of a much simpler job of just passing a constituional map, why not have that ammendment create some sense of electoral fairness instead of fossilizing this "sausage" for all posterity?

[7,052,770]

why not just put TX in the SE and MT and WY in the pacific?  That'd be mininal changing

[King]

why not just put TX in the SE and MT and WY in the pacific?  That'd be mininal changing

Then they aren't contigous....Texas is too far east to be added to the Pacific

[Niles Caulder]

why not just put TX in the SE and MT and WY in the pacific?  That'd be mininal changing

If I'm counting right, the Pacific only needs one more state to total 10.  Texas in the SE would make it 10.  Bumping another state out of the Midwest so it dominoes East would make 3 more 10's, and  would do the trick.  You're approach is very feasible.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Getting a map that both fits the Constitution and that people like will be extremly tough.  Now here a proposal for a map if we got rid of the rule of five and instead had a rule of seven that had seven states each of which would be required to have at least seven states.

The only problem I see is that the Great Plains region currently has no one registered there IIRC, but I suspect taht would soon change as I am certain that at least one or two ambitious people would "move" there to run for governor.

[Niles Caulder]

You know...I REALLY like this idea too.  12 Senators invites more participation, and more consensus building when they get in office.  Plus the difference between "majority" and "supermajority" is more than just a single vote when a seat is vacant.

Perhaps shuffling Ohio the the Blue Midwest, and then Minessota to the Great Plains, that would solve the representation vacancy?  The single 8-state-region being the sparcely populated Great Plains I think is an intuitive solution.

[King]

You know...I REALLY like this idea too.  12 Senators invites more participation, and more consensus building when they get in office.  Plus the difference between "majority" and "supermajority" is more than just a single vote when a seat is vacant.

Perhaps shuffling Ohio the the Blue Midwest, and then Minessota to the Great Plains, that would solve the representation vacancy?  The single 8-state-region being the sparcely populated Great Plains I think is an intuitive solution.

Niles, regions do not effect Senate Seats....

[Nation]

Am I the only one who thinks it's fine the way it is?

[King]

Am I the only one who thinks it's fine the way it is?

I say we just forget about this and PARTY!!!!

[Niles Caulder]

Niles, regions do not effect Senate Seats....

King, I'm sorry--I've scoured the Folders to corroborate that...but I can't find it.  The Constitution stickied to the Folder say Regions do dictate Senate seats; and if there's been an ammendment changing that, I'll be happy to shut up with the only complaint that the Constitution displayed needs to be updated for accuracy.  Can you point me to what I'm missing, here?

[Nation]

Niles, regions do not effect Senate Seats....

King, I'm sorry--I've scoured the Folders to corroborate that...but I can't find it.  The Constitution stickied to the Folder say Regions do dictate Senate seats; and if there's been an ammendment changing that, I'll be happy to shut up with the only complaint that the Constitution displayed needs to be updated for accuracy.  Can you point me to what I'm missing, here?

Niles, I hate to break it to you, but we've broken the Constiution on MANY ocassions when it made things unnecessarily difficult, etc. We try to keep the focus on ELECTIONS, not the inner workings of the government.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Am I the only one who thinks it's fine the way it is?

I'm fine with the current situation, and I don't like any of the proposals for region map that fit the five regions of ten states each model that Constitution currently calls for.  However, I don't see any Constitutional crisis.  The Constitution doesn't specify how long the Senate has before it must submit a map that fits the model and that until then the old map will be used.  In short, the only reason to fiddle with things would be if there was a desire to change the regional boundaries.

[YRABNNRM]

Am I the only one who thinks it's fine the way it is?

It definatly is.

[Niles Caulder]

Niles, I hate to break it to you, but we've broken the Constiution on MANY ocassions when it made things unnecessarily difficult, etc. We try to keep the focus on ELECTIONS, not the inner workings of the government.

Sen. Nation, believe me I understand branches of government coloring outside the lines of the constitution--and it lasts for as long as most everyone is happy enough for government to save face about it.  This isn't just a Fantasy Forum dynamic...it's the real world.

I'm not here to ruin the fun for the thing for everyone in the Senate.  I never wanted to do that.  If 'inner workings of government' isn't what they want to do--just run to win to run for re-election again--that's great!

For me, the fun is reading the Region, and knowing the Govt. had chances to do some fantasy governing.  To me, the results of that front would make elections ten times more fun--give voters something to have opinions about beside the same old pie-in-the sky "abolish abortion/abolish death penalty" tedium.

I want to have fun.  I want everybody to have fun.  I'm having fun pulling this thread and giving the Supreme Court something to handle--if they choose to hear my case, presuming they feel it necessary if it looks like the Senate won't act.  If the Senate can have fun in the game trying to be accountable to Constitutional Government--then it can address the issue rather than pretending it doesn't exist after the citizens being governed point it out.  If this regionalization thing is NO fun at all for the represenative government...then the Senate can hope that the Supreme Court will just dictate a solution--regardless of public opinion, but have the whole thing done with so we can move on.  (You wouldn't be the first legislature to get stymied on this issue and have to hide behind the Court's authority to escape the wrath of the majority of voters!)

So if the Senate wants to wash its hands of it all, and the Supreme Court will have fun hearing the case, then I'll go that route instead.   If the Executive branch via the Attorney General thinks it'll be fun to weigh in (perhaps on the Senate's behalf pleading the case against me, so much the better.  I'll have fun doing that too...and y'all won't have to be bothered much.    (If the Court doesn't take the case, I'll know they feel the same way about things that some of y'all do--and that'll settle things right fast.  I will still have had fun trying to do the right thing, and at least some citizen will have noticed the Constitution doesn't mean a fig in all this fun.)

The bridge between fantasy elections and fantasy government is fantasy politics.  Fantasy conflicts are inevitable...and I think there is so much room in this Forum for everyone to have fun concentrating on the aspects of those Fantasy political games they most enjoy.

The fun I'm having right now is seeing how much sound governing one fantasy citizen can do.  No better place to start than forging a strong and sound reverence for the Constitution.  I'm not out to become an unpopular spoiler of everyone's fun to do it.  I trust the system y'all have in place to resolve my fun so that everyone else retains theirs, too--win or lose in game terms.

[JohnFKennedy]

Heh, or you could just do a poll and see how many people want it to be changed? I bet you the majority doesn't.

Regardless, this is a Constitutional issue that must be addressed.

That is what I was saying all along way back when the regions were decided but nobody listened .

[Niles Caulder]

I'm fine with the current situation, and I don't like any of the proposals for region map that fit the five regions of ten states each model that Constitution currently calls for.  However, I don't see any Constitutional crisis.  The Constitution doesn't specify how long the Senate has before it must submit a map that fits the model and that until then the old map will be used.  In short, the only reason to fiddle with things would be if there was a desire to change the regional boundaries.

I think that's a great route to take for the Defendant and a great Constitutional debate:  Does the legislative branch have the right to indefinately delay its undated constitutional mandates?  Or do the constitutional specifications of the Regions indicate that they really have to do it eventually?

[Niles Caulder]

Ok, I see it now:  the alteration of all Senate seats to Districts WAS a constitutional ammendment: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?board=13;action=display;threadid=2532

For that reason, I'm altering my brief to apply solely to the issue of representation by govornerships.

Again, going to the effort to add ammendments to the copy of the constitution provided in the HQ link would prevent some confusion, as was certainly the case for me.

[Niles Caulder]

Heh, or you could just do a poll and see how many people want it to be changed? I bet you the majority doesn't.

Regardless, this is a Constitutional issue that must be addressed.

That is what I was saying all along way back when the regions were decided but nobody listened .

Senator JFK...in the event I can't persuade either of my Senators to initiate some simple and appropriate legislation...would you be receptive to doing so, for the sake of preserving the Senate's austerity and leadership?

[??????????]

I support Niles and his initiative. We need to keep the grounds of the constitution firm. Veering off the path of constitutionality could lead us in to VERY dangerous waters.

[7,052,770]

How about this?  Very little change

[Niles Caulder]

How about this?  Very little change

I thank both of my District Senators for taking the lead in this important cause!  I think Senator Harry's proposed map is 100% sufficient, and I hope the Senate will embrace such a pragmatic solution (that WON'T require a Constitutional Ammendment to enact!)  The lack of an existing govorner for the new Midwest Boundries that Ernest mentioned can be easily solved in the ways he suggested.

Senator JFK is obviously a public servant who understands the portend of this issue as well--so that's 3.  Just getting just a couple of the others to sign off (if for no other reason than to put this thing to rest) can't be THAT hard...I look forward to the good fight on the Senate Floor.

[Niles Caulder]

And just for the record, (given this map) if Gov. Ilikevern decided to represent the Midwest District with an official residence in some Midwest Hotel room, I'd surely support his efforts there...(even if it required me to send my mail to the same hotel.)

Hughento:  You're listed in the Senate, and you've been working constructively on this thread.  Do I assume correctly you're on board, at least in principle?  If so, that'd be 4.

So when do y'all suppose we'll see the Senate take up legislation?

(I'll betcha the Supreme Court is wondering that, too.)

[KEmperor]

(I'll betcha the Supreme Court is wondering that, too.)

Now why would you think that.....

[Niles Caulder]

(I'll betcha the Supreme Court is wondering that, too.)

Now why would you think that.....

LOL...well, I cling to this fantasy that you government patriarchs don't have the ending worked out already behind the scenes.