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: Informed Consumer Preference
Details
Submitted by[?]: Tuesday Is Coming
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: November 2096
Description[?]:
| The national government currently allows 5 different food standards to exist in Lodamun. This will be changed to simplify commerce and ensure that no state is safer than another. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Food safety policy.
Old value:: Local governments determine food safety standards.
Current: The government introduces, and actively enforces, food standards provisions.
Proposed: The government recommends food safety standards, but they are not enforced upon businesses.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 00:48:10, August 16, 2005 CET | From |  Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Informed Consumer Preference |
| Message | The national government currently allows 5 different food standards to exist in Lodamun. This will be changed to simplify commerce and ensure that no state is safer than another. |
| Date | 00:53:48, August 16, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Informed Consumer Preference |
| Message | this calls for a rush to the bottom. "No state may be safer than another" -- in other words, no state may be safe. At the moment our members feels afe eating in Port Andalay, but this will allow any company to ignore food safety regulations. Its beef is infected with BSE? No matter, the law does nothing to protect consumers! |
| Date | 05:11:25, August 16, 2005 CET | From | Tuesday Is Coming | To | Debating the Informed Consumer Preference |
| Message | All states may be safe, however, food standards are not a matter that can be allowed to be different for each state. This is harmful to interstate commerce at the least. |
| Date | 06:00:21, August 16, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Informed Consumer Preference |
| Message | what you are doing with tbis bill, however, is reducing food standards to a uniformly low value and denying the government any right to prosecute companies that knowingly spread diseased food. A carefully-written bill would specify that knowingly spreading disease was illegal. Or it might allow local governments to enforce the voluntary standards, as the previous ASP bill on this topic did. Your bill recklessly endangers human health. |
| Date | 06:47:03, August 16, 2005 CET | From | Adam Smith Party | To | Debating the Informed Consumer Preference |
| Message | What is being done with this bill is providing a national standard that the ststes may adopt if they wish. |
| Date | 06:53:17, August 16, 2005 CET | From | Cooperative Commonwealth Federation | To | Debating the Informed Consumer Preference |
| Message | the previous bill did, in the text. This one offers no such protection. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 239 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 211 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: In Culturally Protected nations, it is the responsibility of players to ensure the candidate boxes on their Party Overview screens are filled in with appropriate names. If a player is allotted seats in a Cabinet bill and has not filled in names for the relevant candidate position, then the program will automatically fill in the positions with names which might not necessarily be appropriate for the Cultural Protocols. |
| Random quote: "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard." - H. L. Mencken |