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: A controversial bill.
Details
Submitted by[?]: Progressive 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: February 2469
Description[?]:
| There is a law in our fair state that limits the compensation one can require for malpractice. Is there a price on human life? Is there a price on the individual's ability to create, think or even walk? We think not. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Tort reform on non-civil lawsuits.
Old value:: There is a cap on monetary damages awarded to patients in lawsuits.
Current: There is no cap on monetary damages awarded to patients in lawsuits.
Proposed: There is no cap on monetary damages awarded to patients in lawsuits.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:19:19, October 09, 2007 CET | From |  Monarchism Démocratique et Fédéral | To | Debating the A controversial bill. |
| Message | We don't support this measure, since it is unfair to doctors, but we would support a specification of the cap level. That way, we can ensure that patients are not cheated out of justice and that doctors are not driven out of business by countless malpractice suits. All doctors have to suffer a certain number of frivolous malpractice suits, and the amount of malpractice insurance doctors would have to pay if this bill passes would be enormous, not to mention the fact that once in a while the courts make a mistake. Senator Auguste Mulac |
| Date | 17:26:05, October 09, 2007 CET | From | Parti de Garde Royales | To | Debating the A controversial bill. |
| Message | The OGP supports the law as is, but is willing to discuss a fixed cap level. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes | Total Seats: 25 | ||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 56 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Players have a responsibility to differentiate between OOC (out-of-character) and IC (in-character) behaviour, and to make clear when they are communicating in OOC or IC terms. Since Particracy is a role-playing game, IC excesses are generally fine, but OOC attacks are not. However, players must not presume this convention permits them to harass a player with IC remarks that have a clear OOC context. |
| Random quote: "If God made man they say Sam Colt made them equal." - Unknown |