Laws, voting and the like

[tsunamy]

I realize I just caused a bit of a kerfuffle in the judicial system thread -- for which I apologize.

 

However, I'd like to point out that not everything that gets discussed in the Assembly needs to be acted upon. And, further, some things that get written up into potential laws may fail. That's a democratic system. It sucks, but it's better than other forms of government that have been tried.

 

It doesn't matter if someone wasn't involved in the discussion -- or still has questions about a law -- and then votes against it. That's their right.

 

I'm not saying this to attack anyone personally and I get that it's frustrating when you put time into something and it fails. I'm just trying to offer caution so that we don't assume everything that gets put up for a vote will pass. I feel that's a dangerous precedent to have.

 

[Sandaoguo]

I think we all know who and what you're talking about

 

Of course bills will fail, and anybody who thinks so is too naive to function! However, an important part of a democracy is compromise. When you have really big, sweeping changes, you're not going to like every aspect. People simply need to accept that. There can be truly existential issues for you, where you will vote against a bill, even if you like everything else. But you have to really check the balance of things --- is it really worth throwing away all the hard work? Is it really that important? If so, fine, vote against.

 

But if it's an existential issue, and you haven't spoken up about it and stated that it was, then I think you should expect some criticism. For instance, HEM made it very clear that the Assembly shouldn't be involved in the judiciary. His very strong statement did have an effect on how the judicial reform debate progressed. When people know where the red lines are being drawn, then they're better equipped to reach a compromise. When those red lines are kept private, then you can't really turn around and say there wasn't an agreement. There was an agreement based upon the information everybody had.

[tsunamy]

I think we all know who and what you're talking about

 

*cue the Carly Simon* Joking.

 

It actually wasn't *only* about you, even though your post is what spurred this. (That and I didn't want to post the above in that thread.)

 

And I totally agree people should speak up -- it makes everything work better even if it is messier.

 

I suppose I just don't want people to accept the status quo or to go with the follow or whatever proper metaphor relates here.

[HEM]

I think you bring up a fair point. I voted for the law because -- at the end of the day -- I was convinced by Belschaft and Glenn that this was a good idea, and the finer points lined up in a way that was (maybe not *ideal*) but decent enough for me to support. This is why debate is such a great thing. I walked into this discussion hating the idea, but I was sold on it. 

 

If you weren't -- fair enough. You have the full right to say so