|
|
Post by North American Republics on Oct 29, 2012 13:32:55 GMT
Welcome to my campaign thread! I am North American Republics, NAR for short, and I want to be re-elected as your Speaker of the Union. Now why would I want that? Well... - I would like to continue overseeing the organization of the forum. I believe that my reorganization efforts have been successful and I will look into other places where more organization is needed.
- I have welcomed transparency and criticism. I am glad to have not received any actual criticism in my "Speaker Feedback Thread," although anyone is still free to go in there and speak their mind about how I am doing. The "Forum improvement Thread" also took serious suggestions from members of the forum to improve it.
- For those of you who do not know of my record within the region, I was a former Minister of Domestic Affairs after working under Michutopia, the role-play master if you will of our region's early days. I was a Deputy Minister of Domestic Affairs under Avaerilon, a master in his own rite. I was also the Secretary of Communications during my time as a deputy minister. I served in the recruitment committee under Cemaes, Grolsch, and for some time under Gunir, helping to increase membership within our great region. I am the author and a co-author of a few acts including, but not limited to, MEPA (Modified Embassy Policy Act, which was entered into the new constitution) and FLAVA (Forum Language and Vulgarity Act).
- A few mistakes were made during my term. I have not gotten around to writing a report on the various pieces of legislation that the region has passed and I have not kept up-to-date on a few pieces of legislation. For that I am sorry. I will not allow such a mistake to occur once again should I be re-elected.
In the end, it is up to you, the member states, to pick who will be your Speaker of the Union for the next few months. I will be accepting any and all questions and I hope that this will be a nice and civil election season! :) Good luck to the other candidates!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2012 23:40:57 GMT
What can you "bring to the table," if you will, that the other candidate/s can not?
|
|
|
|
Post by North American Republics on Oct 31, 2012 12:35:19 GMT
Sorry for not responding earlier.
I bring nothing new to the table, but I do not see that as a hindrance. I will correct the mistakes that were made under my first term and work from there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kingdom of Grolsch on Oct 31, 2012 14:39:33 GMT
Ok. Could you give examples of what you'd change?
|
|
|
|
Post by North American Republics on Oct 31, 2012 15:57:49 GMT
Thank you for the question. I do not believe that any sector of the Open Parliament, as it is now, requires any change. Of course, others may bring up ideas that would include the Open Parliament and I would take a vested interest in them and am willing to see how well they work out, scraping those that do not work (either practically or constitutionally), but alas, legislative activity has dwindled significantly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kingdom of Grolsch on Oct 31, 2012 18:19:09 GMT
Ok, thanks for le answer.
|
|
Avaerilon
Member State 
The Royal Cartographer, Peritus Scriptor Litterarum
Former Delegate, Minister of DA and Registrar of the Court
Posts: 6,518
|
Post by Avaerilon on Oct 31, 2012 21:02:43 GMT
How will you further the co-operation between Domestic Affairs and the office of the Speaker?
|
|
|
|
Post by North American Republics on Oct 31, 2012 21:17:37 GMT
Quite simply by dialogue and that goes for every ministry as well. Dialogue is very important between the Speaker of the Union and the members of the Social Liberal Union. To better help the ministers, a Speaker must open up clear pathways for discussion. That discussion should also take place in the public eye in order to keep things transparent. Perhaps, in dealing specifically with the co-operation between Domestic Affairs and the Speaker of the Union, the Speaker could promote Domestic Affairs events and participate within them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eggy216 on Oct 31, 2012 21:48:40 GMT
Your opponent has mentioned that the duties of the speaker include "hold[ing] the ability to review acts for Constitutionality." What is your opinion on how this function should be carried out under the constitution?
|
|
|
|
Post by North American Republics on Oct 31, 2012 22:11:11 GMT
I think that sticking to the principles that made our region great, that are enshrined within our constitution, should be the main way that constitutionality should be determined. For every single bill to enter the Open Parliament, I will parse the constitution and acts to determine whether the bill is constitutional, sticking to a more or less strict definition of constitutionality.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eggy216 on Nov 1, 2012 0:37:50 GMT
As a follow-up, would you be doing this solely on your own or would you be using the help of others?
And what would you do if you were the author of the bill?
|
|
|
|
Post by North American Republics on Nov 1, 2012 16:09:42 GMT
I always like taking into account the opinions of other people, but in the end the decision would rest with me. If they can present a good reason to continue on with a bill/act, then I will take that into account. I would prefer strict constitutionality, but am willing to relent in the event that a good argument is given.
If I were the author of the bill, I would have already looked into the constitutionality of said bill, but if concern is raised, I would not ignore it. I would ask the party that raised the concern to point out specific parts of the bill that are unconstitutional and if others support the motion, then I would remove those portions or alter them in a manner that is acceptable for those discussing it.
|
|
