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: Republic Amendment
Details
Submitted by[?]: United Republics Party
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 2415
Description[?]:
| Establishes a Republic |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The constitutional right and responsibility to propose a cabinet to the legislature.
Old value:: Only the largest party can propose a cabinet.
Current: Each party can propose a cabinet coalition.
Proposed: Only the Head of State can propose a cabinet coalition.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Structure of the executive branch.
Old value:: The Head of State is hereditary and symbolic; the Head of Government chairs the cabinet.
Current: The Head of State is also Head of Government.
Proposed: The Head of State and Head of Government are two separate officials.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The formal title of the Head of State.
Old value:: HRH King
Current: President of the Commonwealth
Proposed: President
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The total number of seats in the legislative assembly. Should be between 75 and 750.
Old value:: 599
Current: 365
Proposed: 659
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:44:48, June 16, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Republic Amendment |
| Message | Any offers made during negotiations on the previous bill are now void. New deals will have to be struck. |
| Date | 22:58:44, June 16, 2007 CET | From | Radical Nationalist Party | To | Debating the Republic Amendment |
| Message | What makes you think we want a Republic now? |
| Date | 03:49:01, June 17, 2007 CET | From | Independent Republican Party | To | Debating the Republic Amendment |
| Message | We fully support the establishment of a republic. |
| Date | 03:57:46, June 17, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Republic Amendment |
| Message | Perhaps the MRP can use some of the good will it has built up with the LDP and FL to convince them to support this proposal. I made attempts to sway them to no effect. |
| Date | 07:10:57, June 17, 2007 CET | From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the Republic Amendment |
| Message | Incidently and most of what i'll be saying comes from the last republic debate, calling Free Lodamun "totalitarian" is hilarious coming from the urp, the party that "negotiates with thier votes" (they said it. this is fact) hilarious. You know, actually treating parties civilly in public is what generates good will, not so much desperate offers that can be easily gone back on after you get our votes; wild accusations; or pot calling kettel situations. Keep it up though, you're winning hearts AND minds. We'll be a republic in no time. Also, way to comment on our not providing evidence that "homosexual couples screw up kids" Did i not link to those news groups and websites hard enough? I mean, i know the internet is like unto a series of tubes but you can click on most of the blue words and they lead to places. Also, I ended up supporting that legislation (albeit begrudgingly). I can't stress enough how much trouble the 5 Kingdoms will be in under a republic with the urp as 2/3 majority. |
| Date | 08:23:43, June 17, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Republic Amendment |
| Message | ooc: I didn't see any links I had to work 12 hours the other day so that might have caised that |
| Date | 08:44:43, June 17, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Republic Amendment |
| Message | *caused Also, I'm confused by FL's strange stance on this issue. 'We won't ever vote for a republic because we don't like you.' to paraphrase. FL claims I don't negotiate, but I've repeatedly tried to negotiate with them on this issue. I'll have other parties know URP offered to 1. resign its entire cabinet except Finance and Internal Affairs 2. Propose the MRP control the office of Prime Minister 3. Not run a candidate in the first Presidential Election 4. Endorse the FL candidate for that election 5. Give the LDP 4 cabinet seats if its choice 6. give FL 2 cabinet seats not chosen by the LDP 7. Let the MRP control the remainder of the cabinet. All this was not enough. I've bent over backwards to accomodate FL and the LDP on this issue, but to no avail. FL claims not to trust the URP, and I don't blame them because I sure as hell don't trust FL. However in a spirit of cooperation which I believe I actually show in abundance the URP will be willing to implement the cabinet changes immediately if FL and LDP pledge to support this bill. Once the cabinet changes are approved this amendment can be put up for a vote. Once it passes, we can either opt for early elections or wait until the next election depending on how much time this whole process took to implement. This is not a power grab. I am the largest party and I anticipate being the largest party through the next election as such I currently have the power that would supposedly be given to an Executive. Not only that I have precluded myself from running in the first Presidential election (and I would pledge not to support new elections without consensus). If anything that's giving up a power I currently have. |
| Date | 09:52:55, June 17, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Republic Amendment |
| Message | Also if FL and LDP agree, FL must send me a message to remind me to endorse him. You can trust me, you cannot trust my memory. |
| Date | 12:40:39, June 17, 2007 CET | From | Radical Nationalist Party | To | Debating the Republic Amendment |
| Message | A Republic can not be BOUGHT through cabinet positions, this is a disgrace and utter joke. This is just bribery, this is making a mockery of our parliment and the URP should be ashamed of themselves. The Republic is a old tradition of Lodamun and has many more benefits than a Republic will have, therefor we see no viable reason to even bother voting on a republic. |
| Date | 16:43:44, June 17, 2007 CET | From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the Republic Amendment |
| Message | NP: The MONARCHY is a old tradition of Lodamun and has many more benefits than a Republic will have, therefor we see no viable reason to even bother voting on a republic. (he misspoke) Personal feelings aside, the URP has proven time and again that if they can get away with it, they will not go through the democratic process. That's it for us. They claim to want a republic but unless they need votes, will not try to work with anyone. No matter how much you attempt to bribe us, we cannot support a republic on your terms unless you give us the ONE thing we asked you for. That one thing is the complete abdication of each and every urp seat in parliament. If they really cared about the people and having a republic is more important than personal power, they will agree to this. That kind of dedication we can get behind, that kind of dedication may be true. also, it would only hurt for one election, the party's high visibility would remain. So: Resign Sit out one election And we'll support you. The people need to see that urp ins't the tyrant-in-waiting that they appear to be. WE need to see that. |
| Date | 21:37:14, June 17, 2007 CET | From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the Republic Amendment |
| Message | URP will not leave its seats and the overwhelming plurality of Lodamese voters who support us. URP will remain in power and the largest Lodemese party for the forseeable future. I have worked with other parties, I included LDP in cabinet proposals when they had zero votes and five votes. URP does go through the democratic process, so... I don't even know what this means. I will not negotiate if I don't need votes is semi-true. Why would I expend all my energy trying to convince the LLCP of something if the NP and MRP already agree with me? LLCP isn't going to change their mind anyway. Let me make one thing clear, offering you cabinet seats is not a bribe. A bad choiceto offer to you, maybe but not a bribe. Isn't that what FL is always saying I never do - negotiate, give and take? Cabinet negotiations are central to the democratic process. This whole sitting out one election is nonsense and a non-starter. Some points: 1. The whole question of pursuit of power. I want FL to explain how I can be seeking a power I already have, namely proposing cabinets - cabinets which will still need to be supported by a majority in parliament. If anything I have offered to reduce my power by not running a candidate in the first election and resign all but two ministries. 2. Trust. No, there is no trust, but I offered to take the first step and have been rebuffed. Just because two people dislike eachother doesn't mean they cannot work together. I offered to trust FL and LDP by installing them into their offices NOW. But I suppose this is not enough. 3. To earn his trust I must resign every seat? This has to be the most outrageous thing I ever heard. FL claims I am an anti-democratic tyrant (which is logistically impossible since I do not control 50%+1 of the seats), and then he demands URP give up it's freely elected seats? URP does want power, just as all other political parties do, can FL not work with them as well? 4. Abandoning the Parliament is not only a disservice to URP's constituents, but also to Lodamun. Did FL even bother to look at NP's position? If URP leaves, NP will reestablish its own tyrannic majority, one far less accomodating than the URP I assure you. Inter-racial sex will be banned again among many other radical NP programs. 5. The time for a Republic is now. Sitting out will hurt my visibility and even if it doesn't, the NP will continue to build it's strength during my absence. The rise of monarchist parties, those ones with zero seats will make passage impossible. Does FL realize that even with a URP/MRP/LDP/FL bill, we'd still barely reach a 2/3 majority. I think it's unlikely to reach this 2/3 hurdle again. Finally I ask FL to end its hypocrisy and embrace its own values. NEGOTIATE! I have offered FL a fair shake and pledge not to go back on it. Trust me as I will trust you. URP has supported a republic since it had zero seats (you can look it up in Lodamun Daily news to confirm). DEBATE! Finally address the actual issues I bring up and not just say FL doesn't trust me again and make outrageous demands that any sane party would disagree with. |
| Date | 23:49:37, June 17, 2007 CET | From | Radical Nationalist Party | To | Debating the Republic Amendment |
| Message | There is no need for a Republic, it has more negatives than positives as already established in debates. Support the monarchy and DEFEND Lodamun traditions and heritage, vote against the Monarchy would be on the verge of Treason. We pleade the the FL to stand firm on this and vote against the Republic and maintain support for the Monarchy. |
| Date | 00:43:02, June 18, 2007 CET | From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the Republic Amendment |
| Message | Of course you'll trust us. We have to vote in a republic first. so you get what you want and the rest of us expect you to deliver? This is irrelevent. Free Lodamun doesn't seek power, we don't need a cabinet position, as such, we cannot be purchased with one. We seek only to have responsible people in Lodamun's seats of power. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 337 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 237 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 25 |
| Random fact: You can inactivate yourself on your User Page. You will then lose all your seats but your party account won't be deleted, and your party's Visibility ratings will not diminish. Reactivation can be requested in the "Reactivation Requests" thread in the Game Moderation section of the Particracy Forum. |
| Random quote: "What we are doing to the forests of the world is but a mirror reflection of what we are doing to ourselves and to one another." - Gandhi |