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: Protection of Property Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Liberal Social Democratic Party
Status[?]: passed
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: April 2429
Description[?]:
| To protect private property from the state |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Eminent Domain.
Old value:: The government may seize private property for vital government works.
Current: The government may seize private property for any reason.
Proposed: The government may not seize private property.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Eminent domain compensation (if eminent domain is legal).
Old value:: The victim of eminent domain determines just compensation.
Current: A neutral body appointed by the courts determines the compensation, either party may appeal.
Proposed: A neutral body appointed by the courts determines the compensation, either party may appeal.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:05:59, July 13, 2007 CET | From | Liberal Social Democratic Party | To | Debating the Protection of Property Act |
| Message | The LDSP moves for a vote on this bill |
| Date | 20:27:32, July 13, 2007 CET | From | Revolutionary Freedom Party -- KEG SLAM | To | Debating the Protection of Property Act |
| Message | We feel that in emergency situations the government should be able to seize private property. . .but must pay through the nose to do it. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 376 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 374 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Unless otherwise stated, monarchs and their royal houses will be presumed to be owned by the player who introduced the bill appointing them to their position. |
| Random quote: "Don't blow it, good planets are hard to find." - Quoted in Time Magazine |