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: Macon Unity Act of 2355
Details
Submitted by[?]: Catholic Workers Union
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill asks for an amendement to the Constitution. It will require two-thirds of the legislature to vote in favor. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: November 2358
Description[?]:
| We hereby recognize the existence of a Macon Union, a federalist state to govern all of Macon with each of the continent's three subnations acting as member states. To reflect these changes we shall initiate the following resolutions. Also, we hereby recognize the Telamon Commonwealth as the official: UNITED MACON COMMONWEALTH OF TELAMON. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The national motto.
Old value:: Honi soit qui mal y pense.
Current: Tælmörk mun standast tÃmans tönn
Proposed: Onward Telamon, Onward Macon
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 23:50:42, February 05, 2007 CET | From | Catholic Workers Union | To | Debating the Macon Unity Act of 2355 |
| Message | This will be preceded by the official treaty, to be presented for a vote as soon as we take over the Foreign Affairs Ministry and draft the treaty. |
| Date | 18:30:33, February 06, 2007 CET | From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Macon Unity Act of 2355 |
| Message | We will await the treaty to see the actual workings of the proposed union but certainly we are in favour in principle and so can support this bill |
| Date | 00:47:54, February 07, 2007 CET | From | Catholic Workers Union | To | Debating the Macon Unity Act of 2355 |
| Message | Excellent. You are an unexpected ally on this path, and we're happy to have you. |
| Date | 01:48:54, February 07, 2007 CET | From | Catholic Workers Union | To | Debating the Macon Unity Act of 2355 |
| Message | Alright, here is the proposed Constitution. Please review it and discuss. http://80.237.164.51/particracy/main/viewtreaty.php?treatyid=546 |
| Date | 11:36:32, February 07, 2007 CET | From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Macon Unity Act of 2355 |
| Message | Well, I know they failed, but when we originally proposed the NATO and then Makon Economic Area treaties, we did have in mind moving in the direction of the EU IRL they were supposed to be the precursors to a more general union for Makon and the surrounding nations. Obviously they failed because we never pursued union outright and because they were a little partisan in nature! (they were also quite weak!), but we have always been in favour of some kind of union or federation!! I know that is a slightly strange position for a centre-right party but still....!!! |
| Date | 13:26:45, February 09, 2007 CET | From | Catholic Workers Union | To | Debating the Macon Unity Act of 2355 |
| Message | Any more opinions! |
| Date | 10:57:23, February 10, 2007 CET | From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Macon Unity Act of 2355 |
| Message | A couple of suggestions we would like to make although they are not essential!! 1. Although implicit in the treaty, could it not be made more explicit as to the role of those leaders not acting as Executive President - i.e. they act as vice-Presidents (though obviously that doesn't mean that much!) 2. We don't really like the name Supreme Congress for the title of the Union's legislature. Why not call it the Makon Continental Congress or something instead. 3. We would propose the establishment of a Makon Council, consisting of the relevent government ministers from each state (depending on the issue being discussed) in order to provide advice to the Union President and to perhaps ensure that local concerns and issues are able to be effectively expressed at a union level, although obviously given the limitations of the game, this would probably have to be a purely advisory body. 4. OOC: I'm not entirely certain that I understand article 5, I have some suggestions, but if they are based on a complete misunderstanding of the article then ignore them!). We propose that the limitation on party organisations be lifted. For example, Right is a very broad term and we would not wish to join an organisation containing neo-facists, but similarly we might not wish to join the Independent organisation. We therefore propose that any number of organisations could be established but with the conditions that they must contain at least one party from each member state and that there should be 3 leadership positions - one for a party from each state. 5. We feel that in order for a union to work effectively, there does need to be an article in the treaty which deals with how to achieve the free movement of goods and people between member states, without border controls etc. and detailing the steps to be taken to abolish tarriffs between member states and to establish common tarriffs for goods coming into the union. 6. We feel that union defence needs to be discussed, particularly as Hutori is no longer a member of NATO (and NATO no longer does very much anyway!) |
| Date | 11:01:17, February 10, 2007 CET | From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Macon Unity Act of 2355 |
| Message | 7. Also, should there not be an article at least vaguely detailing the seperation of powers - which are for Union discussion only and which are reserved to member states (obviously only need a vague clause and not necessarily a detailed list at this stage)? |
| Date | 01:05:47, February 11, 2007 CET | From | Catholic Workers Union | To | Debating the Macon Unity Act of 2355 |
| Message | All very good suggestions. I've implemented the first four because I think they apply appropriately to the present Constitution. The next three are important to discuss, but I'm afraid adding any more articles to the current Constitution will almost certainly guarantee its destruction in other Macon member states. So I've added Article 8 to charge the first Congress with drawing up laws regarding these issues as soon as it convenes. Also gives the Continental Congress (great name) something to do as soon as it's organized. Nice to have your help. If that's all acceptable it's time to pass the Constitution. |
| Date | 01:09:03, February 11, 2007 CET | From | Catholic Workers Union | To | Debating the Macon Unity Act of 2355 |
| Message | Actually, point 3 will be incorporated into Article 8's recommendations as well, since I can't think how we'll do that one. |
| Date | 01:26:43, February 11, 2007 CET | From | Catholic Workers Union | To | Debating the Macon Unity Act of 2355 |
| Message | Time to pass this. Everybody together now. |
| Date | 03:28:55, February 11, 2007 CET | From | National Fasco-Communist Order | To | Debating the Macon Unity Act of 2355 |
| Message | We fail to see any reason to support a united Macon, much less a proposal by the MD-FP. |
| Date | 10:06:11, February 11, 2007 CET | From | United Liberal Alliance | To | Debating the Macon Unity Act of 2355 |
| Message | We thank you for taking our proposals into consideration and our happy to support ratification of the union! |
| Date | 17:41:43, February 11, 2007 CET | From | Catholic Workers Union | To | Debating the Macon Unity Act of 2355 |
| Message | Please rethink this MLP. This is a proposal that has bipartisan support, and the UCA and the MPC have both contributed to its organization. There is no partisan undertone here. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 377 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 156 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 68 |
| Random fact: Make sure to check out Particracy's wiki. http://particracy.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page |
| Random quote: "Terror is only justice: prompt, severe and inflexible; it is then an emanation of virtue; it is less a distinct principle than a natural consequence of the general principle of democracy, applied to the most pressing wants of the country." - Maximilien Robespierre |