We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Compromise in Regulations Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: freedom party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: May 2086
Description[?]:
| It is the belief of the party that a compromise be reached between Socialist and Anarcho Capitalist thoughts. Thus the party introduces this bill. It would allow agencies which regulate "blind spots" (i.e. things the public is unaware of, thus cannot boycott) to go on regulating as they are currently. However, in cases such as the FDA, the government would continue to post its warnings, however companies, provided that they are labeled clearly as NOT FDA APPROVED would still be allowed to release their products. This would prevent the tragedies of instances where for example, someone died from Aids because they had no access to an experimental drug that was "dangerous for them" It would also provide that all regulatory agencies be up for review every four years, in order to determine their necessity and classification. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Food safety policy.
Old value:: There are no food standards provisions.
Current: The government introduces, and actively enforces, food standards provisions.
Proposed: The government recommends food safety standards, but they are not enforced upon businesses.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 11:28:30, July 20, 2005 CET | From |  freedom party | To | Debating the Compromise in Regulations Act |
| Message | The freedom party respectfully requests feedback in order to expedite the debate process and put the tax payers dollars to best use. Your timely consideration is appreciated. |
| Date | 23:06:06, July 22, 2005 CET | From | freedom party | To | Debating the Compromise in Regulations Act |
| Message | The freedom party does not understand why its constituents remain silent on this issue. |
| Date | 02:21:21, July 26, 2005 CET | From | freedom party | To | Debating the Compromise in Regulations Act |
| Message | We urge the constituency to vote for this bill and not "food regulation act". This is the middle ground for socialists and anarcho capitalists. Where as the food regulation act would put rigid laws on the food industry hurting the economy and even blocking potentially helpful products. It as well doesnt address serious issues as prescription regulation as our bill does. |
| Date | 04:04:23, July 26, 2005 CET | From | freedom party | To | Debating the Compromise in Regulations Act |
| Message | how can the liberty party have done nothing to change the state of food regulation in saridan in its tenure, yet vote down a bill which seeks to improve conditions?? |
| Date | 05:03:04, July 26, 2005 CET | From | Commercial Freedom | To | Debating the Compromise in Regulations Act |
| Message | We disagree. Food safety should not be optional. |
| Date | 05:28:41, July 26, 2005 CET | From | freedom party | To | Debating the Compromise in Regulations Act |
| Message | But if it isnt approved by government, it is clearly labeled. This will give people clear warning that its not "safe" While allowing people to get access to things that have been deemed wrongly as "unsafe" or things such as experimental drugs. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 5 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 193 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 102 |
| Random fact: Players have a responsibility to differentiate between OOC (out-of-character) and IC (in-character) behaviour, and to make clear when they are communicating in OOC or IC terms. Since Particracy is a role-playing game, IC excesses are generally fine, but OOC attacks are not. However, players must not presume this convention permits them to harass a player with IC remarks that have a clear OOC context. |
| Random quote: "Seventy-seven percent of anti-abortion leaders are men. 100% of them will never be pregnant." - Planned Parenthood advertisement |