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: Military Regulations
Details
Submitted by[?]: Republic People Party
Status[?]: defeated
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: March 2467
Description[?]:
| Some changes needed... |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The nation's defence industry.
Old value:: The state owns national defence industries but these exist alongside privately owned defence industries.
Current: The state owns national defence industries but these exist alongside privately owned defence industries.
Proposed: The state owns all defence industries.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Nation's policy with regards to an intelligence agency.
Old value:: The nation has an intelligence agency, but it is limited to counter-intelligence and surveillance of other countries.
Current: The nation has an intelligence agency that is permitted by law to undertake all types of covert operations in other countries.
Proposed: The nation has an intelligence agency that is permitted by law to undertake all types of covert operations in other countries.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:25:26, October 06, 2007 CET | From |  Republic People Party | To | Debating the Military Regulations |
| Message | Defence inustries must be owned by state because it is more convenient for humanbeings. (Privately owned defence industries can make the government start a war to "earn" more money.) |
| Date | 18:34:19, October 06, 2007 CET | From | Democratic Rationalists (PrCoa) | To | Debating the Military Regulations |
| Message | Interesting argument, RP. But might government owned defence industries lobby for war to justify their budgets? What is the difference in incentives which makes it less likely that government owned defence industries will be as corrupt as privately owned defence industries? We're voting no on this for now. But we'll change our vote on a persuasive argument. |
| Date | 09:12:41, October 07, 2007 CET | From | Industrialist Party of Aloria | To | Debating the Military Regulations |
| Message | We have a perfectly good defense industry. We have public armies and mercenary forces allowed. Mercenary forces are more efficient, but those who join the public armies aren't as likely to flinch at the sight of danger, they're more than likely to do it for Aloria, not the money. As for Article 2, we will support it in a separate bill. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes | Total Seats: 98 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 572 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 30 |
| Random fact: "Treaty-locking", or ratifiying treaties that completely or nearly completely forbid any proposals to change laws, is not allowed. Amongst other possible sanctions, Moderation reserves the discretion to delete treaties and/or subject parties to a seat reset if this is necessary in order to reverse a treaty-lock situation. |
| Random quote: "Changing the way we measure things is vital. So is decompartmentalising society making sure that economics and politics are not divorced from other crucial areas of life." - David Attenborough |