SO 2017-27 Prime Ministerial Elections Act

Article I: Introduction
In order to encourage the spread of diversity in regional elections, we, the Parliament of the Union, move to codify into law the tradition that the Prime Minister must be elected with an absolute majority of votes cast.

Article II: Quotation from Aralunya, Original Founder
“For the [...] prime minister a majority needs to be achieved. If that requires more than one round then so be it. And we'll remove the candidate with the lowest votes” (Aralunya, Parliamentary Union of Nations RMB, October 12, 2015).

Article III: Eligibility
1) Are eligible to stand and vote in Prime Ministerial elections only those residents of the Union who are currently members of the NationStates World Assembly.
2) If a candidate resigns from the NationStates World Assembly during the election, he is disqualified and all votes for him are rendered void.
3) If a voter resigns from the NationStates World Assembly after having cast a vote in a Prime Ministerial election, his vote shall be rendered void.

Article IV: The Process
The Prime Minister will be elected by uninominal majoritarian ballot with two rounds, as follows:
1) Members may propose their candidatures to the Founder during the two weeks prior to the election. They may list or not affiliation to one or more political party.
2) After the candidatures are closed, the first round of voting will begin. The Founder will post a three-day poll on the regional page with the name of each candidate and their (optional) political affiliations, restricting voting to the NationStates World Assembly residents.
3) If, in the first round of voting, a candidate secures a majority (half plus one) of the votes cast, they are elected Prime Minister.
4) If, in the first round of voting, no candidate secures a majority (half plus one) of the votes cast, then a second round of voting will be held. The Founder will post another three-day poll on the regional page with the name of the two candidates with the first and second highest number of votes in the first round and their (optional) political affiliations, restricting voting to the NationStates World Assembly residents.
5) The candidate with the most votes in this second round is elected Prime Minister.
6) If at any point in this process there is a relevant tie of votes, the candidate with the longest permanent residency in the region is favored.

Article V: Conclusion
We, the Parliament of the Union, hereby enact this document and its provisions as law, to be cited as "[The] Prime Ministerial Elections Act 2017".

April 28, 2017
The Hon. Abdoa, MP (Speaker p.t.) LSM GSM

Just modified the Presidential Elections Act to fit. Last in my elections trilogy .

I applaud the work of my Hon. Colleague Abdoa, LSM GSM. I wish to cosponsor this bill.

I wish to abolish Article IV, section 6. I don't think that the permanency in our Region should be an element to make a candidate President in case of tie votes. I do think we should call further elections. Or the candidates who share the same amount of votes find themselves an agreement. For the rest, Abdoa has done a magnificent job!

Well, that provision is there, as it is in the Presidential elections act, because it a frequently used criteria in RL elections, which is slightly adapted for NS here: the nation with the longest residence is most frequently the more invested in the Union, and the least likely for that reason to CTE during his term. In France, for example, the youngest candidate is elected in ties, as he is the least likely to die in office.

Holding more elections is on the surface a good idea but in reality a rather annoying one in our situation, as - especially in such a small region as ours - there is a distinct possibility that we will just continue having elections until one candidate becomes tired of the divisions and quits. We, the Parliament, cannot afford to settle only for "most cases", but for "all cases", whenever we can. And letting the candidates negotiate themselves is a path strewn with the evils of intimidation, vote-buying, and corruption, when the wrong people are running.
So essentially, the residency rate rule is not great, but its the most arbitrary way of solving a tie (randomness is less than ideal because it can be manipulated quite easily).

Yeah Yeah you've got a point. But I don't share this kind of scenario. That's it. I think we may let the Parliament vote, in case of tie votes, as We're 9 Senators, and no draw can be as a result.

But MPs can abstain or simply be absent. I too was against the provision for the Presidential Elections bill, but after debate, I realized that there was no better way to do it.

We may not allow abstention for the Presidential Elections. And for what concerns the Absent, there are always no more than 1-2.

Or if the voting members result to be in a divisible number, (2, 4, 6) then I will renounce to vote, so we can reach a majority.

But we cannot assume that a Senator will forfeit their vote, and if there is only one senator absent, we have an even number, we cannot allow for these kinds of loopholes: its bad policy to leave such gaps in legislation.

Then we can pass the ball to the Cabinet, and then to the Prime Minister for the final decision.

The PM appointing his successor? That is even worse for accountability, while the Cabinet is entirely appointed by that same nation: same problem there.

I suggest that the one who has received the most votes from MRS should be elected, in case of tie votes.

MRS?

*MPs:) typo

Again, what if only eight of the MPs vote in the election: there is no way to get around ties with votes, because unlike in some real-life legislatures, we cannot force people to vote, because we cannot force them to log on and pay attention.

Then I propose to elect the one who's been President for the least for the times. So we can guarantee, in our Region, a regular change of positions within our Government.

What if they have each been Prime Minister the same number of times? Again, there's a tie. What if neither have ever been elected - its the same problem. I understand your wish to avoid an arbitrary residency tie-breaker, but is a number of times elected to government test really better?

And remember this is only in the case of "relevant ties", which have never before happened in our region.

Yeah, you're right.

Please go debate in the Debate Hall.