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: NMP Constitutional Reform Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Democrats
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: May 2423
Description[?]:
We realise that the following article has been proposed several times in recent years, and has been defeated because of a URP/NMP block vote on the issue.
However after our subsequent defeat we realise that the NMP has been foolish to oppose the following, and that the electorate has chosen to punish us for opportunism.
We see no reason to continue to maintain the URP in power, even if they do remain the largest party in the nation. We accept that the URP is antagonistice towards most of the other parties in Lodamun, and their recent decision to call a no confidence vote in the NMP led government, without even hinting at such a measure to the Prime Minister has caused even the NMP t place itself in a positon where it does not want to work with the URP in the next government.
Therefore recognising the popular support at all previous votes for a reform of the constitution in this area, and recognising that we no longer see the URP as the party of government, we propose that the constitution be altered so that all parties with representation in the FPP should be provided with the opportunity to propose a government. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:49:23, July 02, 2007 CET |
From | Democrats | To | Debating the NMP Constitutional Reform Bill | | Message | As there is no need to debate this, we push to vote. Again, th NMP must apologise for voting it down in the past. |
| Date | 22:08:13, July 02, 2007 CET |
From | The Unified Lodamun Party | To | Debating the NMP Constitutional Reform Bill | | Message | Honestly, I'm against this, but I'm tired of the URP not having any stance whatsoever of reality in which to base his beliefs, and if this will get him out of power, then I'm for it. Voting against your own agenda simply because you don't like the party that proposes a bill, is ludicrous, and I'm tired of it. |
| Date | 22:12:02, July 02, 2007 CET |
From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the NMP Constitutional Reform Bill | | Message | That's not how I vote. I also would like to point out that reforming the monarchy would also change the way governments are formed. perhaps the PFP should look into that option. |
| Date | 22:17:44, July 02, 2007 CET |
From | Democrats | To | Debating the NMP Constitutional Reform Bill | | Message | Aye, the PFP has two options, the option to elect an individual who then chooses the cabinet, or the option to allow all the opportunity to choose the cabient |
| Date | 22:25:23, July 02, 2007 CET |
From | United Republics Party | To | Debating the NMP Constitutional Reform Bill | | Message | We believe the party who should propose the cabinet should have 50% support of the ELECTORATE and not be the largest party. Small parties would have the option of endorsing non-URP candidates. |
| Date | 22:32:56, July 02, 2007 CET |
From | Democrats | To | Debating the NMP Constitutional Reform Bill | | Message | 50% support is garnered either way, we do not see that as a big deal, nor do we see it as dishonourable to suggest that level of support can be aquired after an election. |
| Date | 21:53:30, July 03, 2007 CET |
From | Free Lodamun | To | Debating the NMP Constitutional Reform Bill | | Message | Why exactly are the capitalists and communists in cahoots? This is base politicing and FL has a hard time understanding how the commies can possibly fall for this.
urp will drop you as soon as they possibly can and will prevent you from passing anything vaguely resembling communist economic policy. Instead of choosing the side that has dropped every ally it has ever had as soon as it was able, why not vote "yes" on this and try to get along with EVERY OTHER PARTY.
Power in the present is less valuable than friends in the future. |
subscribe to this discussion -
unsubscribeVoting
| Vote |
Seats |
| yes | Total Seats: 299 |
| no | Total Seats: 279 |
| abstain | Total Seats: 21 |
| Random fact: RP laws follow the same passing rules as in-game variable laws. Laws that are not of a constitutional nature require a simple majority "Yes" vote from active parties currently holding seats. Laws that are of a constitutional nature require a 2/3 majority "Yes" vote from active parties currently holding seats. RP laws may be abolished a simple majority vote this applies to ANY RP law. |
| Random quote: "We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors; we borrow it from our children." - Native American proverb |