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: Cabinet Proposal of August 2086
Details
Submitted by[?]: Tuesday Is Coming
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill presents the formation of a cabinet. It requires more than half of the legislature to vote yes. Traditionally, parties in the proposal vote yes, others (the opposition) vote no. This bill will pass as soon as the required yes votes are in and all parties in the proposal have voted yes, or will be defeated if unsufficient votes are reached on the deadline.
Voting deadline: September 2087
Description[?]:
| Throwing another idea out there. This time we pick a center left party to balance the HOS. |
Proposals
Article 1
As per the Constitution, the President of the Commonwealth chairs the cabinet.
Article 2
The responsibilites of Science and Technology will be conducted by the 
Tuesday Is Coming
Article 3
The responsibilites of Foreign Affairs will be conducted by the Lodamun Centre-Left Coalition
Article 4
The responsibilites of Internal Affairs will be conducted by the Adam Smith Party
Article 5
The responsibilites of Finance will be conducted by the Adam Smith Party
Article 6
The responsibilites of Defence will be conducted by the Tuesday Is Coming
Article 7
The responsibilites of Justice will be conducted by the Chorus of Amyst
Article 8
The responsibilites of Infrastructure and Transport will be conducted by the Adam Smith Party
Article 9
The responsibilites of Health and Social Services will be conducted by the Tuesday Is Coming
Article 10
The responsibilites of Education and Culture will be conducted by the Adam Smith Party
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:48:29, July 27, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | Swap yourself with the MLP in one of either the HoG or Foreign post. Both of these allow you to make announcements. |
| Date | 23:39:57, July 27, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | The MLP was put into the HoG post so that they could represent the opposition there(see bill description). They also prefer to have Foreign post.... I dont see any announcements that I plan to make... |
| Date | 23:56:24, July 27, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | How do I even edit this bill without destroying it? |
| Date | 00:32:10, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | interesting |
| Date | 01:25:42, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | Interesting? |
| Date | 02:10:41, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | Would Green Advantage be willing to negotiate places on this proposed cabinet? |
| Date | 02:28:26, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | You can't change the bill you have to delete it and re-propose it changed. It is probably better to negotiate with the greens to before this is done though, otherwise you will just have to do it again. (This is the reason why the cabinet bill is excluded form the 24 hours in debate rule) |
| Date | 02:46:58, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | ((Ah. Wouter could probably change this if someone mentioned it to him...Perhaps parts of the cabinet could be voted on individually, as separate articles?)) |
| Date | 06:21:20, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | Does anyone have any preferences(for themselves or others) concerning cabinet posts? (TiC has some, but they are pretty vague and undefined until more duties become active.) To list some we are aware of: We are aware of MLP's strong preference for foreign affairs. ASP seems to prefer Science/Tech/Agriculture, and Economics codified TiC prefs: We prefer that the Defense ministry be shared by a more-or-less like-minded party Same for economics and education, we prefer a capitalist there. HoG and HoS we prefer to belong to opposing views. Infrastructure we would prefer to give to a socialist, as most infrastructure "stuff" is socialistic in nature. |
| Date | 10:32:54, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Lodamun Centre-Left Coalition | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | We would like to note that the Green Advantage is no longer in a coalition with the MLP. However, the MLP would like to see the CNT/AFL in at least one position. |
| Date | 16:27:34, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | CNT/AFL is away, so can't negotiate, but has said they will only be in cabinet if it's a consensus cabinet or a leftist one, so they would refuse your offer MLP. If the leftist cabinet proposal fails by DSP not voting, then it's either a consensus cabient or a centre-right one. My math says you have a majority to pass this with ASP + TIC + MLP if you want, so you don't need me. If you want me, then I am willing to negotiate. |
| Date | 16:34:56, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | We are certainly willing to pass internal affairs to GA if this helps. We do not require three seats in the cabinet. |
| Date | 19:46:10, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | Correction/Clarification. If we don't need three, we certainly don't need four seats. |
| Date | 19:50:29, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | CNT/AFL is away, so can't negotiate, but has said they will only be in cabinet if it's a consensus cabinet or a leftist one, so they would refuse your offer MLP. If the leftist cabinet proposal fails by DSP not voting, then it's either a consensus cabient or a centre-right one. My math says you have a majority to pass this with ASP + TIC + MLP if you want, so you don't need me. If you want me, then I am willing to negotiate." This cabinet proposal would have included CNT/AFL, except for their statement made earlier. In the absence of them as the opposition, we chose MLP. We hope that by allotting them the head of government role in addition to their foreign affairs role, they will approve of this increase in their power. As it was written, this bill was supposed to get the votes of MLP, ASP, and TiC. We have nothing against negotiating with you, green advantage, but in order to do that we sort of had to have a cabinet bill on the table. This has accomplished that. If you pledge to vote in favor, there are certain positions we can put you into. The ASP was given four seats, due to size, but they have already indicated a willingness to surrender one, for example. |
| Date | 19:56:42, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | Let's go ahead and vote on this. I cant change the terms of the bill, but you can continue to debate here. Later we can adjust certain parts... |
| Date | 21:35:20, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | It would have been better to scrap this, and re-propose in line with the discussion. (i.e. including GA, reducing our role as we also have the HoS position) etc. We originally proposed a cabinet including the CNT/AFL but they declined to be included. (Calculating incorrectly that they could pass a cabinet without the ASP or TiC supporting it.) |
| Date | 21:59:17, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | Feel free to vote against. If this bill was scrapped, rather than submitted, the debate and negotiations here would have been discarded. Even if this bill passes, future bills can change the cabinet again. |
| Date | 22:13:01, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | We will vote for on the basis that we would be happy with this cabinet, but it probably won't pass. |
| Date | 22:18:07, July 28, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | It all comes down to whether MLP wants to be head of government... |
| Date | 01:25:06, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Democractic Socialist Party of Lodamun | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | gotta oppose |
| Date | 02:31:14, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | Sorry for not including you, We are sure you are aware that you would have been had we known you were active. However, we can hardly blam you for your vote, as you are conspicuously absent from this bill. |
| Date | 03:48:22, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | gotta oppose too |
| Date | 11:20:57, July 29, 2005 CET | From | Lodamun Centre-Left Coalition | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of August 2086 |
| Message | Despite the tough call, party members have voted 20-18-3 in favour of such a Cabinet. Sincere apologies are offered to the members of the current Cabinet. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 227 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 107 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 116 |
| Random fact: Players are expected to play the game independently and should not share their passwords or allow others to access their accounts. |
| Random quote: "The National Rifle Association says, 'Guns don't kill people; people kill people,' but I think the gun helps." - Eddie Izzard |