City, County, and State

This article adds to the proposition paper published Jan. 3, and its updates.

When the entire country falls into the districts of this organization, then one representative from each may come forward to join a national legislature. Forgetting about bylaw amendments, that body will be able to lead on national campaigns. How do we make claims against the government of California, and redress them? How do we do this with the government of Maricopa County? Initially, each district has implemented three branches. What can now happen is to elect campaign leaders in any or all of the jurisdictions of the US, as desired. To begin with, there are no branches here; there is only a possible desire for campaign leadership in the jurisdiction. More offices than this may be amended as desired, such as in large states.

There are two ways in which US jurisdictions or domains occur. There will be domains that are smaller than one national district, and there will be those that are larger. Presently, US federal districts and states enjoy contiguous boundaries, as each US district is entirely within its own state. We will no doubt enjoy as much geographic alignment on other levels; between our wards and districts, and the various significant US domains. A US domain smaller than a district is overseen by the district, and a larger US domain is a multi-district affair. For multiple districts sharing a larger US domain, they are in a position to each send forth their delegates to form a common committee, which will pass through any proposals made by itself or by other, amended campaign leadership, for any legislative activity in the name of claims, campaigns, and redresses.

To remain flexible, I do believe we may want any of our ward and district delegates to also be able to function as campaign leaders in their own domains. They would be functioning in their regular capacity as ward delegates, and adding campaign leadership to their duties, for example, in some amended US domain. I do believe we will want to cap how many offices a person can simultaneously hold, and to also remain open to well-utilizing our best people and not creating more offices than we need.

The amendment of a large state is of quite a substantial thing. It may have campaign leadership, but it may also draw upon much larger resources than a district, and it may expand to the point of passing its own legislation at the state level, for operations corresponding to state government. This may bring the districts of that state to come together to form a state districting grid, to produce a state legislative body, that then functions as operational leadership corresponding to state government. This could go on, into creating districting for cities and counties, and having legislatures, in effect, in their respective domains. It may go as far as the leadership would like it to, or not, but in the end, so long as the original grid of ward and district delegates exists, then there is an elected person everywhere.

A level of detail that has not, as of yet, been rendered, is that of parliamentary rule, or all of the rules of the legislature, in how they break down their work and provide all of their own internal checks. For example, a procedure to draw up wards in a district may be rendered in the original writing. This organization would do well to have a national resource of these type of rules, where they may be helpful to thousands of people filling legislative offices in districts across the country. In keeping with the US method, these rules could be kept separately from the bylaws, to be amendable by the legislature. Having a committee for any "area" of claims and campaigns could be nationally mandated, and such committees could be given defined roles regarding campaign control, from the legislature's point of view.

In the use of the above instruments, I imagine there is a district legislature that is watching and following along with the national body. National claims will be filed, and campaign areas and committees will be defined and amended. A district legislature is in a position to look at its own geographical breakdown, and organize the district structure in relation to it. Secondly, there is what difference there may be between ward delegates and leadership across ten hypothetical campaigns. Maybe a ward delegate is someone who doesn't want to do all of that, and maybe that is too much for any one ward delegate to do...

I see US domains as places where activity can originate, as relatively independent of national campaigns. This can come by way of action originating at state or local levels. I see places for success at these levels, because this is where an organized group of people can more easily democratically tip the political scales. To be at the lead for a county-level operation may be all-consuming for the one doing it. As described, there is a great open space for how the districts amend their various domains, and define their respective leaderships. There is a great range in potential for operations at all jurisdictional levels. Every district has to at least cover its own ground, and every district begins with its own legislature to do so. District legislatures may be so small, that they may not wish to have ten separate committees for campaign areas, but they may wish to have one larger standing committee for all campaign areas. I would say that within national specifications, to each district its own.

I do think that there will be people who do not feel like being representatives as much as they might like to be working in particular campaigns, and so the ability to amend leadership positions for these people would seem more organic and well-aligned with their resources. Meanwhile, those who are in the legislature will be staffing their committees, amending new writing, caucusing their members, and participating in campaigns.

The matter that I see arising to be addressed here is the power structure between legislators and campaign leaders. The former are all based on equal-population districting, whereas the latter do not fall in such grids. They could be made to fit in such grids, however; and they could be given equal voting in, I think, claims, campaigns, and redresses, but not on bylaw amendments, which I would consider giving to elected executives. The amount of voting power for such offices could be scaled, to some extent, to the size of the regions they cover.