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: Call for early elections, March 2449
Details
Submitted by[?]: Judicial Union Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill requests an early election. It requires more than half of the legislature to vote yes. This bill will pass as soon as the required yes votes are in, or will be defeated if unsufficient votes are reached on the deadline. Elections will be held immediately if the bill passes.
Voting deadline: November 2449
Description[?]:
We, the Judicial Union Party, call for early elections as soon as we can reach a consensus. |
Proposals
Article 1
Arrange early elections as soon as this bill passes.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
Date | 01:20:15, September 02, 2007 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Call for early elections, March 2449 |
Message | The fact that no government has yet been formed since the last election shows that it is necessary to hold another. |
Date | 18:28:09, September 02, 2007 CET | From | Greenish Liberal Democratic Socialists | To | Debating the Call for early elections, March 2449 |
Message | It is also a fact you, being by far the biggest party, didn't take the initiative to supply even a single realistic cabinet proposal. We believe early elections won't help if you're not willing to compromise a bit on the number of cabinet seats. Personally I don't care too much about who's minister of what, but if you want a cabinet bill to succeed you at least have to fullfill two simple requirements: - the parties have a majority (unless off course you have the support of a non-cabinet party to form a minority government, but then you could just as well include that party) - the cabinet represents their relative strength (otherwise the underrepresented parties could opt for another coalition in which they get more seats). |
Date | 06:15:37, September 03, 2007 CET | From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Call for early elections, March 2449 |
Message | Why would you possibly include parties in the cabinet which disagree with your own party on matters of politics, that's just a rubbish idea. Confidence agreements make more sense, and indeed we would have a new cabinet if parties kept to their agreements. But you're obviously much better at this, which is why your much more reasonable cabinet proposal succeeded. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
Vote | Seats | ||||
yes |
Total Seats: 178 | ||||
no | Total Seats: 113 | ||||
abstain |
Total Seats: 208 |
Random fact: In order for a Cabinet bill to pass, more than half of the legislature must vote for it and all of the parties included in the proposed Cabinet must support it. If your nation has a Head of State who is also the Head of Government, then the party controlling this character must also vote for the bill, since the Head of Government is also a member of the Cabinet. If any of these requirements are not met, the bill will not pass. |
Random quote: "Wherever you have an efficient government, you have a dictatorship." - Harry S. Truman |