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: Subsidisation of Contraception
Details
Submitted by[?]: Libertarian Communist Party
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: July 2040
Description[?]:
| In the interests of public health, we feel it would be beneficial if the government were to supply completely free contraception upon request. We invite debate on this issue. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Government policy on subsidising contraception.
Old value:: The government does not supply free or discounted contraceptives.
Current: The government offers free contraceptives in pharmacies and public toilets.
Proposed: The government subsidises a considerable discount for contraceptives.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | not recorded | From | Front for a Solidarian Country | To | Debating the Subsidisation of Contraception |
| Message | We would agree with such bill. Free contraception campaigns, combined with sexual education on the matter, have proven to be very successful methods to reduce levels of both abortions, abandoned children, and aids prevalence rates. |
| Date | not recorded | From | To | Debating the Subsidisation of Contraception |
| Message | Contraception ought to be freely available for all. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Social Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Subsidisation of Contraception |
| Message | We have absolutely nothing against the use of contraception, but we have considerable qualms about increasing government responsibility yet further by providing free contraceptives. Those who currently purchase contraceptives are the same ones that would turn to abortion if for whatever reason contraceptives were not available. Sexual education is already being taught in schools according to legislation we have already passed and contraception would do absolutely nothing to prevent AIDS. This leaves the matter of abandoned children. We understand that some women simply cannot afford to use contraception, and that it is harmful to society when these women give birth to many unwanted children who often end up on the streets or in orphanages. However, it is also harmful to society when the government must spend such a large amount of money that it can provide free contraceptives--many of which will undoubtedly go to waste. Therefore we will support a discount for contraceptives, but nothing further. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Front for a Solidarian Country | To | Debating the Subsidisation of Contraception |
| Message | You say that those who buy contraceptvies are those who would turn to abortion. That is not true. In many cases, people that turn to abortions are those poor or uneducated enough to engage in safe sex. In addition, We must prevent unwanted pregnancies first, keeping abortion as a last resort. By the way, note that I understand 'contraception' as 'contraception methods', which includes condoms. We believe that free condoms, which are cheaper than preconceptive pills, will help to defeat aids as well. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Social Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Subsidisation of Contraception |
| Message | Condoms are nice too, yes. We still see absolutely no reason to supply free contraceptives, which could theoretically be collected by up-and-coming entrepeneurs and then sold on the street. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Libertarian Communist Party | To | Debating the Subsidisation of Contraception |
| Message | Why would people purchase contraceptives from these up-and-coming entrepreneurs if they're freely available? |
| Date | not recorded | From | Social Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Subsidisation of Contraception |
| Message | Public toilets would have simple dispensers. Those could be easily cleared out by one person and collected. This means one of two things: 1) that contraceptives will be too difficult to obtain for free because it is simply not convenient enough to do it if one has to go to a far-away government depot or 2) if there are numerous government depots, then we'll be spending money on thousands and thousands of wasted contraceptive products, because quite frankly, when people see something is free, they will take as many as they can and/or use them ineffeciently. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Neo-Marxist revolutionary Party | To | Debating the Subsidisation of Contraception |
| Message | So, instead of just having contraceptives available in public toilets have them available in chemists and pharmacies as well where people can be monitored upon how many they take. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Front for a Solidarian Country | To | Debating the Subsidisation of Contraception |
| Message | The neo-marxist party has a point. Contraceptives (including condoms) should be completely free, and should only be available in chemists and pharmacies, so that the system is not abused. Remember, after all, that not everybody has the money to buy even the most cheap of preconceptive methods. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Social Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Subsidisation of Contraception |
| Message | Even if you eliminate the idea of putting contraceptive products in public toilets, you have to still deal with the fact that when something is free, it is much more frequently wasted; this has been proven with such simple things as food and such strange things as printing privileges in universities. The government will be forced to spend immense amounts of money to provide free contraceptives, many of which will either go unused or be overused. Some men, for example, may go to the drugstore for some lubricated condoms even if they don't have a significant other nor any prospects of getting one. If those condoms go unused for a certain period of time, they deteriorate and become useless, thereby being wasted on someone who would not have normally gone out of his way to purchase them. Also, some men will use two condoms at once for "extra" protection, which is completely unnecessary, but encouraged because the condoms cost nothing. We believe that if certain communities feel it necessary to supply free contraceptives, then they may undertake the initiative privately, but to make the government take this responsibility is just going to waste money that we will need to squeeze from the populace with more taxes. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Libertarian Communist Party | To | Debating the Subsidisation of Contraception |
| Message | We'll meet halfway on this issue, then. If consensus in the future indicates the need for further measures, it can always be brought to the vote again. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Libertarian Communist Party | To | Debating the Subsidisation of Contraception |
| Message | (It wouldn't let me edit the bill description before putting it up for vote, unfortunately) |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 153 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 33 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 65 |
| Random fact: The people in your nation don't like inactive parties. When you often abstain from voting for a bill, they will dislike your party and your visibility to the electorate will decrease significantly. Low visibility will means you are likely to lose seats. So keep in mind: voting Yes or No is always better than Abstaining. |
| Random quote: "I came, I saw, I conquered" - Julius Caesar |