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: Supreme Presidential Cabinet 2453 - 2456
Details
Submitted by[?]: Federal Independent Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This bill presents the formation of a cabinet. It requires more than half of the legislature to vote yes. Traditionally, parties in the proposal vote yes, others (the opposition) vote no. This bill will pass as soon as the required yes votes are in and all parties in the proposal have voted yes, or will be defeated if unsufficient votes are reached on the deadline.
Voting deadline: June 2454
Description[?]:
| Supreme President Wesley Clark's cabinet selection. |
Proposals
Article 1
As per the Constitution, the President chairs the cabinet.
Article 2
The responsibilites of Science and Technology will be conducted by the 
Conservative Party of Solentia
Article 3
The responsibilites of Food and Agriculture will be conducted by the Conservative Party of Solentia
Article 4
The responsibilites of Environment and Tourism will be conducted by the Independent Party
Article 5
The responsibilites of Trade and Industry will be conducted by the Federal Independent Party
Article 6
The responsibilites of Foreign Affairs will be conducted by the Federal Independent Party
Article 7
The responsibilites of Internal Affairs will be conducted by the Federal Independent Party
Article 8
The responsibilites of Finance will be conducted by the Federal Independent Party
Article 9
The responsibilites of Defence will be conducted by the Federal Independent Party
Article 10
The responsibilites of Justice will be conducted by the Liberal Party of Solentia
Article 11
The responsibilites of Infrastructure and Transport will be conducted by the Independent Party
Article 12
The responsibilites of Health and Social Services will be conducted by the Liberal Party of Solentia
Article 13
The responsibilites of Education and Culture will be conducted by the Liberal Party of Solentia
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:44:17, September 11, 2007 CET | From | Labour Party of Solentia | To | Debating the Supreme Presidential Cabinet 2453 - 2456 |
| Message | I am pressing again for the involvement of the Workers Party in this cabinet and enquire as to why the Liberal Party has so many posts. |
| Date | 23:52:52, September 11, 2007 CET | From | Federal Independent Party | To | Debating the Supreme Presidential Cabinet 2453 - 2456 |
| Message | ((OOC: If you read my last post which it seems you failed to do, you would have a clear understanding why.)) |
| Date | 05:27:55, September 12, 2007 CET | From | Liberal Party of Solentia | To | Debating the Supreme Presidential Cabinet 2453 - 2456 |
| Message | Supported. Though I have one query. Why does the FIP continue to give the Independent Party ministery positions when they make very little notable contribution to Solentian politics? I understand you are locked in a political alliance with the IP, but may I suggest a revision to that policy? Cadel Livingston, Supreme Presidential Candidate |
| Date | 21:31:03, September 12, 2007 CET | From | Labour Party of Solentia | To | Debating the Supreme Presidential Cabinet 2453 - 2456 |
| Message | The Labour Party would like to inform the FIP we did read your comments and have acknoweldged them but would like you as a party to acknowledge, we will fight everytime for propotional representation in the cabinet. If the Workers Party has that many seats they should surely end up with some key cabinet positions and every cabinet proposal there is, the labour party will fight to ensure our people are equally represented. Jack Henshaw, Labour Party Leader |
| Date | 01:55:21, September 13, 2007 CET | From | Workers Party | To | Debating the Supreme Presidential Cabinet 2453 - 2456 |
| Message | We disagree with that. The place for proportional representation is the Senate, not the Executive branch. The executive must be coherent; our presence in it, in coalition with the four mainstream parties would harm such coherence, and hamper the cabinet's ability to govern the nation. Plus, our constituency gave us a mandate to exert the firmest opposition to the four-party rule; we would betray them if we accepted places in a cabinet dominated by the bourgeois parties. Sen. Gudrun Gonzales - Workers Party |
| Date | 05:01:47, September 13, 2007 CET | From | Federal Independent Party | To | Debating the Supreme Presidential Cabinet 2453 - 2456 |
| Message | I may note that the recent support for Federal Independent Senators and Supreme Presidents have superceded any party in the history of the First Modern Democratic Republic of Solentia. Maintaining 45% of the Senate's seats and winning in a landslide Supreme Presidential election with 65% of the vote is a clear mandate from the people to push forth our beliefs, traditions, and long-lasting record of politics which we have upkept since 2414 [as the Federal Independent Party]. We have stated why we govern the way we do and obviously, the people have no problem with it. And as a party that has always appreciated the voice of the minority, we can understand why you protest the cabinet. But any party that stands in the way based off of divisive reasoning such as resorting to communist terms to attempt and offend us only make us dislike what you say more. This party has a general dislike for any communist that is bloodthirsty for a "revolution through the proletariat". In fact, our grandfather party overthrew a totalitarian communist government and won in a landslide to tear down the communist's dictatoriship. Solentians have since been cautious of any communists and have even held a cautions towards socialists. If the Workers Party claims it doesn't want to be part of this bourgeois cabinet, that's fine. There's more room that way for Ministers that won't be calling for revolutions and for the opposition against any citizen that makes up the 80% of the populous that didn't vote for them. FIP Majority Leader Peter Quincy |
| Date | 05:11:01, September 13, 2007 CET | From | Federal Independent Party | To | Debating the Supreme Presidential Cabinet 2453 - 2456 |
| Message | "Supported. Though I have one query. Why does the FIP continue to give the Independent Party ministery positions when they make very little notable contribution to Solentian politics? I understand you are locked in a political alliance with the IP, but may I suggest a revision to that policy?" ---Cadel Livingston, Supreme Presidential Candidate Aside from mentioning that the Independent Party has been a key player in Solentian politics - for whatever reason, siding with our party or against it - and that it contributed to the way Solentia has been molded the past few decades. Their ability to work with us and to work with others is notable. They have never been a party to create political tension and have never really fanned the flames of debate to a point of politically incorrectness. However, I may note that may be due to the fact they rarely interact in debate. But, I would believe that this question would be much more appropriately directed at the Independent Party. Shouldn't it be them explaining why they are worthy of the cabinet seats offered to them? Shouldn't you be questioning Independent Party leaders Mr. Livingston? After all, you did inquire what value they add to Solentian politics and debate. I believe this is a better prompt for the Independents to answer themselves. So, on behalf of Mr. Livingston, I'm sure we'd all like to hear from Mr. Carver or another notable Independent Senator, to answer his fair question. I, personally, am waiting to hear this response. FIP Majority Whip Vedrin Levish |
| Date | 10:29:59, September 13, 2007 CET | From | Liberal Party of Solentia | To | Debating the Supreme Presidential Cabinet 2453 - 2456 |
| Message | Mr Levish, You contradict yourself. "Shouldn't it be them explaining why they are worthy of the cabinet seats offered to them?" No Mr. Levish, the Supreme President selects the cabinet. I believe it should be him who justifies his decision to include cetain parties in his cabinet. I would appreciate if a more competent FIP Senator were to reply so my questions may actually answered. Cadel Livingston, Deputy Party Leader and Supreme Presidential Candidate |
| Date | 00:36:00, September 14, 2007 CET | From | Workers Party | To | Debating the Supreme Presidential Cabinet 2453 - 2456 |
| Message | OOC - How is it that this proposal appears to have been defeated, if it had a clear majority? Another bug? Luís Henrique |
| Date | 05:16:09, September 14, 2007 CET | From | Federal Independent Party | To | Debating the Supreme Presidential Cabinet 2453 - 2456 |
| Message | You're rudeness is not going to be left unnoticed. Mr. Livingston, there's a proper way to approach things in Solentian politics and apparently you don't know these guidelines. I myself have more important things to do rather than be seen responding to a politically incorrect person who is the equivalent of a Senate Page that has yet to mature. FIP Majority Whip Vedrin Levish |
| Date | 05:20:18, September 14, 2007 CET | From | Federal Independent Party | To | Debating the Supreme Presidential Cabinet 2453 - 2456 |
| Message | ((OOC: If you looked at my last explanation in the last cabinet about why I picked each party, you would understand my reasoning. Not to mention, I put a blurb in the post above yours giving a short answer to your question. Noted here: "Aside from mentioning that the Independent Party has been a key player in Solentian politics - for whatever reason, siding with our party or against it - and that it contributed to the way Solentia has been molded the past few decades. Their ability to work with us and to work with others is notable. They have never been a party to create political tension and have never really fanned the flames of debate to a point of politically incorrectness." That counts for something I would hope.)) |
| Date | 08:53:05, September 14, 2007 CET | From | Liberal Party of Solentia | To | Debating the Supreme Presidential Cabinet 2453 - 2456 |
| Message | (OOC: Not personally attacking any of you, just trying to build a character out of Cadel Livingston, as an outspoken and ambitious politician. Thought it might liven things up a little, and it seems to have done just that =) ) |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes | Total Seats: 301 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 83 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 41 |
| Random fact: References to prominent real-life persons are not allowed. This includes references to philosophies featuring the name of a real-life person (eg. "Marxism", "Thatcherism", "Keynesianism"). |
| Random quote: "It is never too late to give up our prejudices." - Henry David Thoreau |