The Instigator
labarum
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
prokaryoticeukaryote
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

At what level should our government exist

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/19/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 391 times Debate No: 44255
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

labarum

Con

con and pro will set up a form of government that they would find ideal for any nation
round 2. what kind of government and how it operates ( no anarchism)
round 3. the powers of the government, the power of the regions under it's control (states, provinces) the power of it's people
round 4. a constitution or code by which to follow
This is a debate, but in a different way. I have a feeling that our forms of government will differ from one another. So when you give your answer, you will say why you gave your answer. The differences listed in our form of governments will provide debate enough between the two of us. For example: I say " Everyone must ride bicycles because everyone is to lazy." you say " Everyone must drive cars because they are not lazy enough." this provides a difference in opinions that will allow us to understand our positions on the matter and for the voter to decide his position, and no, rebuttals are limited to each to the round they are mentioned in and in a form that does not directly mention the opponents nation but can suggest, like " I would allow everyone to wear hats, unlike some people." Also TURN ON YOUR F****** INBOX SO I CAN MESSAGE YOU THE INFO FOR WHEN EVER YOU HAVE QUESTIONS!!!!!!!
prokaryoticeukaryote

Pro

I respectfully accept Con's request for setting up forms of government that exist. My inbox has been turned on. Apparently, Debate.org, by default, only allows members to receive messages from friends. However, I am curious about by why Con did not or was unable to post a comment in this debate in response to the comment I posted.

I eagerly await Con's description of an ideal government.
Debate Round No. 1
labarum

Con

Thank you for accepting. For the hell of it i'm naming my country the central Asian confederacy

My Ideal form of government would be a Representative republic. This government would have three branches. The consulship (executive) would be the branch of government that enforces the laws and may veto them, but only if the senate agrees, or the laws have failed to accomplish what they were suppose to do ( each law will have specific goals set out and a relative time period in which these laws may be accomplished), or public approval ratings drop below 25%. The head of this branch will be headed by the consul. The consul will be elected by the population for up to one term in office that lasts four years. After the first two years of a consuls term the senate will hold a vote of confidence in which they will vote on weather or not this consul is fit to finish their term. Weather or not they will be voted out is decided upon if they have kept true to his campaign promises, they have not or attempted to enter the nation into a conflict that is none essential to the welfare of the confederacy, or has blatantly lied to the public. If they vote yes, he will lead out the last half of his term. If no, he will be impeached and a new election will be held.

The second branch of government is the Senate which will be unicameral. Headed by speaker whom is appointed by consul. The senate is made up of senators who are elected by the local population of their state. each state has five senators at all times. Each senator can only be elected for one term and they serve four years. The senate has the job of making new laws. Three fourths of the senate must vote on a bill in order for it to be passed on to the consul, who may then approve it or veto it. When It comes to the vote of confidence, three fourths of the senate must vote in favor of impeachment in order for the consul to be impeached. Senators can be impeached by the supreme court if the senators have shown evidence of abusing their powers. I may not have to elaborate on what 'abusion of powers' would be considered, but I will any ways. Diverting state funds to fit personal needs, using power to sway court cases, interacting in illegal activity i.e. drugs, selling weapons, fights etc. etc. The final job of the senate is to add or repeal amendments to the bill of rights. I will go into more detail in the final round on this matter.

The final branch of government is the judicial branch. The judicial branch of governments job is to interpret the laws passed by both the senate and consul. The judicial branch also has a second function, and that is to act as check against the senate. The judicial branch may impeach senators who have shown signs of abusing their power. I have a detailed description above. The judicial branch is made up of ten different judges, all of whom the senate have elected amongst themselves. There is no head of this department, rather it is run collectively by all of the judges. All the judges serve of up to one term that lasts five years. If one of the judges have shown signs of abusing their power, it is within the consul's power to impeach this judge.
prokaryoticeukaryote

Pro

prokaryoticeukaryote forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
labarum

Con

labarum forfeited this round.
prokaryoticeukaryote

Pro

prokaryoticeukaryote forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
labarum

Con

labarum forfeited this round.
prokaryoticeukaryote

Pro

prokaryoticeukaryote forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by prokaryoticeukaryote 3 years ago
prokaryoticeukaryote
I'm so sorry. Something came up at work. I will have to forfeit this debate. That's an interesting idea you have for government structure, though. In particular, I like your idea of holding officials' feet to the fire by holding a review. I have my own ideas for how one might hold officials accountable, but unfortunately, I just don't have the time.
Posted by prokaryoticeukaryote 3 years ago
prokaryoticeukaryote
This sounds interesting, but I have some questions. Is this a debate, or just an exchange of ideas? Should each answer consist of a suggestion appropriate for that round and a rebuttal of and agreement with that which was proposed by the opposing party of the previous round? Are rebuttals to rebuttals allowed?
No votes have been placed for this debate.