by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

1

DispatchBulletinPolicy

by The Democratic Republic of Suvmia. . 12 reads.

Government Options


UNITED REGIONS ALLIANCE IMPROVEMENT PLAN

Introduction


In order to streamline the administration of the United Regions Alliance, it was deemed necessary to review the constitution outlining how it is run. In addition to this, President Suvmia has decided to do a wholesale review of how the executive is structured, and how best to manage this aspect of the Alliance. This dispatch is a detailing of each proposed style of governance, the benefits of said structure, and the drawbacks, so that the members of the Alliance can make the appropriate decision.


Option 1: Status Quo


The Alliance is managed by several different Councils, each with a different purpose; specifically, the WA Affairs Council, which handles the World Assembly aspect of the Alliance, the Recruitment Council, which handles the recruiting of new regions to the Alliance, the Public Affairs Council, which handles the public affairs of the alliance, the Electoral Council, which handles elections, and the Roleplay Council, which handles the interregional roleplay that is offered. In addition to these councils, there is the Civil Council, which is a body of all representatives of member regions that votes on internal legislation. Finally, there is the Alliance Cabinet, which is a body made up of the Head of each Council as well as the President, Vice President, and Founder. The Alliance Cabinet acts as an advisory body to the three executives, who manage much of the overarching operations of the Alliance. Most positions are elected, except for the Head of the WA Affairs Council, who is appointed by the President, and the Founder.

The benefits of this style are that the duties of each council are relatively decentralized, and they are able to function almost entirely independently. In addition, the executive have a good amount of power to take care of things as they arise. As well, the Civil Council fully represents the entirety of the Alliance Membership fairly and equally on internal legislation. Some of the drawbacks, though, are that every member of the Alliance Cabinet needs to be active and able to carry out the respective duties of their department at all times or else their department falls apart completely. As well, the executive has no checks or balances on their activity other than public opinion. Finally, the Civil Council is inactive and inefficient in producing good legislation.


Option 2: Board of Directors


The Alliance is managed by several different departments, each headed by a Director, who is elected by the citizens of the Alliance. Each department has structured roles within it for specific tasks, such as World Assembly Affairs, Public Affairs, etc. There is no body representing member regions for internal legislation, instead internal legislation would be handled by the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors is made up of several individuals; the Director of each department, the Founder, a CEO, who is elected by the people of the Alliance, and 5 regional representatives, who rotate each 3 month quarter. All major decisions that impact the Alliance, such as policy, treaties, or structural changes, will be voted in via consensus by this Board of Directors. The CEO can act in a relatively unimpeded way for most duties, but their main task is to set goals of the Alliance and ensure the departments are working properly to achieve them. They can be removed by a vote from the Board of Directors.

The benefits of this system are that it provides a good sense of structure for each department of the Alliance. As well, it centralizes the conduct of internal legislation while still giving regional representation. Finally, it limits somewhat the power of the executive through consensus decision making while still giving some latitude on running the Alliance. However, it does reduce the representation that regular regions have on day-to-day Alliance affairs considerably, and while the restructuring of the departments does provide some safety nets in the case of inactivity, it can also be viewed to only add more gears at which the system can fail.


Option 3: Presidential System


The Alliance is managed by various departments, each headed by a Minister. Various departments include Foreign Affairs, World Assembly Affairs, Cultural Affairs, and so on. These departments have some sub departments responsible for specific areas of Alliance Administration; for example, the Foreign Affairs department would be made up of a department for improving relations between member regions, a department for establishing relationships with larger, outside organizations, and a department for recruiting new member regions. These departments are all independently administered. For overall leadership, there is a Cabinet, made up of the Founder, the President, and the Vice President, as well as all of the Ministers. All positions in the cabinet are elected, except for the Founder. The President is able to act in a relatively unimpeded manner, but the cabinet can choose to act as a consensus decision-making body. For regional representation, a simple representative council made up of voting members will act as the main body for passing internal legislation, subject to cabinet approval.

This system has a good set up for functionality, as even if the head of one department is inactive or incapable, the other departments are not impacted. For example, if the department taking care of recruitment is inactive, the Minister of Foreign Affairs can step in to help out until it is self-sufficient. As well, this system gives the departments a lot of latitude in their own affairs, without taking a huge amount of power away from the executive. Finally, a system with two houses for internal legislation would be efficient considering that the upper house (cabinet) could act without the lower house (representatives) as they are not as invested or engaged with the subject of internal legislation. However, there are some drawbacks. Independent departments could mean that other members of government are not informed as to what is going on in a broader sense, and they may contradict other departments through their actions. As well, the President still has quite a bit of latitude to do whatever they wish, and there do need to be some checks on that power. Finally, the regional representation will not be as total as it could be, considering the Cabinet could act without their consent on matters of internal legislation.

The Democratic Republic of Suvmia

Edited:

RawReport