Taking Congress Seriously
Mr Woldy
Another Congress Article
As a nation, we need to start taking Congress seriously.
The fact of the matter is, no one really does. Once a month the Parties get in a fluster and act like they care in order to come out trumps in the dickwaving contest which is our elections, and apart from getting the most people elected, very few parties seem to have a genuine interest in making Congress an active, responsible and worthwhile institution.
What little concern the top parties have with Congress seems to be in making sure that they hold a majority, or at the least that their big rival doesn’t - presumably so they know where they stand in respects of who can impeach whose CP.
Does this play in the power holders hands? As it stands, our Congress does diddly, which means whichever party elects a CP on the fifth gets absolute control for a month, without any criticism (that’s partisan!) to keep them in check. Even if the party without a CP holds a majority they won’t say anything unless they believe they have the opportunity to outright impeach, in which case a party whip will be sent out and the PP’s involved will cross their fingers that the people they elected have managed to stay active.
Our current ethos
Indeed we now operate in an autocratic nation, which isn’t all that strange for eRepublik. In fact being a somewhat global citizen I know that once you hit alliance levels people tend to appreciate do-nothing Congresses, as one person having to say ‘how high’ is a lot easier to manage than forty odd having to say it. So perhaps to some the autocratic system has its merits.
However, for us down here we are practically left without a say, the body of people who are claimed to represent us literally do nothing towards that end, and do absolutely nothing towards achieving their only other job - which is making sure the CP isn’t an autocrat and ensuring the CP is held to account. THAT is what the impeach button is actually for.
So in reality the citizens are left with no say at all, beyond choosing a CP (largely chosen by PPs anyway) there are very few channels for normal people to actually be heard. Although Congress candidates are also chosen by PPs, we would hugely benefit from our voters being more savvy, and directing their votes to those parties they know will actually elect Congressmen who do their jobs.
How democratic is a country with a do-nothing Congress?
However when the Nation operates in a zeitgeist that promotes laziness, it takes more than a few individuals with newspapers to change things. A good start would be Congressmen taking themselves seriously, so that we can begin to take them seriously. Back in the days of roleplay etc. Congress was an active body that used to discuss what went on with the eUK, used to hold the CP to account and would often spend days discussing the issues that reared themselves. Discussing the merits of roleplay is a different kettle of fish, but I think there’s a lot to be said about the fact that if Congressmen actually played as Congressmen, we wouldn’t be so left out of the political system as we currently are. Whether or not them taking themselves seriously requires even a tiny splash of roleplay remains to be seen, but going on our history it probably wouldn’t hurt to encourage them to do their jobs.
Once Congress takes itself seriously, I also believe that party bickering will lessen. If you actually give Congressmen issues to discuss, you will find that the differences between party policies come out naturally, people will align themselves with the people they naturally agree with, and party politics will actually become about politics and not about mindless attacks and partisanship. Which is all it currently is (and vapid articles shamelessly bribing you to join them).
So, we can conclude that one way or another, Congress has to take themselves seriously, and we have as a Nation to take Congress seriously, otherwise we abandon all power and influence to our monthly dictator, without any means of actually regulating behaviour and creating consistency.
Again, voting smart is important - vote for those you know do the work - Pressure your PP’s about it!
And one more thing, I hereby name Waynekerr as Heir to the throne of the eUnited Kingdom.
~~~
Thanks for reading!
HM Woldy I,
OBE, KCVS, MC, HRH.
To apply for the ‘Woldy’s Young Achievers’ Scheme, simply pop your name in this thread on our external forums:
http://tinyurl.com/WoldWelcomes
Comments
I like how a self-styled monarch is giving a lecture on autocracy 😛
>self-styled
>enthroned by the people
NICE TRY YOU DIRTY REPUBLICAN
It's indentured servitude
If only we had someone like Woldy in charge multiple times to implement this... oh wait.
= v =
HAIL KING WOLDY
Vote&Sub 😛
Waynekerr is the new heir to the eUK throne. God help us.
dog farts
If you want a reliable congress, just vote Kraven in every month... Oh, wait....
u can't vote kravenn, but u can vote his party... oh, wait...
Democracy, it gives the rights to make the stupid people vote!
We all know eRep isn't a democracy, it's more of an oligarchy.
Something is rotten in the state of eUK,
Democracy is a form of government that substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.
Voted, Congress needs to wake up
For the king o/
Having congress discussions hidden away in group messages is a terrible way of doing business. Prospective new congressmen are given the impression that zero activity is required for the job.
we talk 'bout issues, which are hidden for national security, sometimes though.
Where else can we discuss them that keeps each member informed?
We have 40 people who can post a thread on the forum each month. Yet very few do. Even forum active congress members don't bother. What's the point when 3 people will read it and maybe 2 of em will make a comment... and tbh 90% of 'discussions' in Conress are about this very fact. Where to hold discussions?
Non sensitive stuff can simply be put in a newspaper for discussion in the comments section. Congress can be told when a new article/discussion comes out via that group PM. Stuff that's deemed no longer sensitive can then be published alongside it.
That's the theory at least. We even elected a speaker to encourage this...
And all that is required is for a couple of Members of Congress to step up, for a PP to support it.
Why would we possibly discuss things in comment sections, that's just way too open to abuse.
Heir... you'll die and I have no chance of an abdication.
Voted
Bow down before your King you dogs because he writes damned good sensible articles!
That shiny medal and extra gold in your account attracts the wrong kind of people to Congress. The role of a Congressperson should be to serve because they want to aid their nation, not because a nice title for their profile has been sufficiently incentivised. Last month's agreement to hand over money to the NHS was a nice step, but I feel that it turned into a spectacle of "Hey, look at us! We're not assholes like that other party!". Also, why aren't we actively questioning those that chose not to contribute? Surely the desire to do so should go hand-in-hand with a position of servitude.
Just some thoughts. I haven't held a Congress position so my rant could be a load of bollocks. As you've pointed out, both Congress and the UK as a whole could do a lot more to improve.
Problem is a lot of the time there isn't a great deal for Congress members to do. A lot of newer congressman are too shy/afraid/ no clue and don't get involved I think for the fact that they don't want to say/do something stupid.
Everyone has an opinion and no one should be afraid to express it. Every time I have been Congress it's always been the same old names in the discussion with the odd eager newb thrown in. Yet parties pride themselves on having the most new congressman...
Get the loud mouths of eUK into congress, let us show you how it's done!
Yet another problem. How do we encourage younger players to more actively promote their own thoughts within Congress without placing them under the guidance of an older player? Unfortunately those that already have agendas can't always be trusted not to try and pass them on, even if it's done subconsciously.
They don't need to be put under 'guidance' just encouragement that there is no such thing as a stupid question only stupid answers...
People will gravitate to those they enjoy spending time with. they will listen to those that strike a chord with their own thoughts and opinions. We can't control that and shouldn't ostracise people for how and who they play the game with.
Oh no, I wasn't suggesting that we should ostracise those players. It's been a recurring theme during my time on this game that certain older players will attempt to raise their own protégés. This has positive impacts, and I'm sure that a lot of the influential players we have now may not have stuck around if they didn't have a friend.
I just can't help but wonder if the UK would look different if every member of Congress voiced their opinion - and I'm sure that some hold back from fear of the party whip. There's no real way to balance this out - at least that I can think of..
Same, only way i can see is if PP's all elected the most loud mouth bastards they can find... let them led by example.
If elected I can guarantee you excellent service to the people of eUK. Let me know if you plan on any initiatives.
As a current Congressmember, I can say that it is frustrating that nothing reasonable seems to be achieved by us. We need to work collectively in order to stop the unnecessary bickering and get work done. I also want to see more transparency between the government and the public to assure the public that we are working in good faith and have nothing to hide. #Truth
FIST
Partisan in some cases is a good thing; shouldn’t be…but, can you imagine congress members thinking for themselves??? The all mighty vote would lose power; a stalemate for almost every vote put to congress.
What I find erred is the fact that most proposals go without debate, is it the 24-hour deadline, maybe not enough time? Depending on the importance, could a 48 or even 72-hour deadline make a difference? The way congress works in my opinion need not be changed just tweaked a little.
I thought the title of the article was a joke. ;-;
You should know me better!
This is rubbish. I haven't ran for congress for years. You don't need a medal to be an active contributor and nobody is stopping anyone from being involved or disregarding anyone's opinion. This is just apologism and if the UK is autocratic in some aspects it's through choice
'if the UK is autocratic in some aspects it's through choice' is exactly the point I'm making, and you don't need a medal to contribute at all, but you need one to do an impeachment - which is the second defence against autocrats.
But your whole argument is "if we treat congress more seriously they will be more active". This is totally backward. If they want to be taken seriously, they should be more active and do more to help.
You may have misread something, as I've written that they have to take themselves seriously before they can be taken seriously by others, so it appears we are on the same page. Back when I did speaker, all Congressmen were forced into working with ministries and underwent activity checks (and were named and shamed if they failed them), Lord Farhan and I have spoken about this and think it would be pretty good to bring such vigour back.
As a new member of the Congress I intend to take my job seriously. The people took there time to vote for the party I am apart of and now I am there voice and to insure that they are heard.