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: Amendment to the Constitution (2477)
Details
Submitted by[?]: Beluzian Workers Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill asks for an amendement to the Constitution. It will require two-thirds of the legislature to vote in favor. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: September 2478
Description[?]:
| An Amendment to retire the monarch, in celebration of over 50 years of His Majesty's reign, and to permit a new candidate to ascend to the Executive. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Structure of the executive branch.
Old value:: The Head of State is hereditary and symbolic; the Head of Government chairs the cabinet.
Current: The Head of State is hereditary and symbolic; the Head of Government chairs the cabinet.
Proposed: The Head of State and Head of Government are two separate officials.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change The formal title of the Head of State.
Old value:: Grand Emperor
Current: Their Majesty
Proposed: President
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The official title of subnational entities, also known as regions.
Old value:: Province
Current: State
Proposed: Republic
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 18:46:15, October 29, 2007 CET | From | People's Populist Party - Zogist Mafia | To | Debating the Amendment to the Constitution (2477) |
| Message | You want every region to be a republic? |
| Date | 18:55:16, October 29, 2007 CET | From | Constitutional Monarchy Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Constitution (2477) |
| Message | thats dumb. And I hate the word president with a passion. you could have given them something a bit interesting. I think Elector Count sounds cool. But president sucks, and there is no way that every region is a republic. There is no reason to change the name of regions... Province is fine. |
| Date | 00:20:38, October 30, 2007 CET | From | Constitutional Monarchy Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Constitution (2477) |
| Message | A nicely phrased act of treason on the part of the Liberals... You have better diplomacy skills than the Communist Party. |
| Date | 16:46:07, October 30, 2007 CET | From | Beluzian Workers Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Constitution (2477) |
| Message | For all we know, Zog may continue as executive - his popularity was high in recent history. |
| Date | 17:28:28, October 30, 2007 CET | From | Constitutional Monarchy Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Constitution (2477) |
| Message | Zog wouldnt want to be called president... its a weak title. |
| Date | 19:54:38, October 30, 2007 CET | From | Constitutional Monarchy Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Constitution (2477) |
| Message | as you have already pointed out, it is fifty years since Zog was granted the title Grand Emperor, what reason is there to remove him? Has Zog done anything to injure the Liberals in all that time? In fact if I remember rightly it was the Beluzian Republican Party which did the greatest harm to us all. As far as i'm concerned the Liberals sudden change in approach to monarchies was unjust and uncalled for. |
| Date | 19:55:14, October 30, 2007 CET | From | People's Populist Party - Zogist Mafia | To | Debating the Amendment to the Constitution (2477) |
| Message | *Zog snaps the necks of two Republicans simultaneously* |
| Date | 01:07:55, October 31, 2007 CET | From | Communist Party of Beluzia and Bailon | To | Debating the Amendment to the Constitution (2477) |
| Message | *zog isn't emperor anymore* |
| Date | 01:20:44, October 31, 2007 CET | From | Constitutional Monarchy Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Constitution (2477) |
| Message | doesnt mean he cant snap your neck |
| Date | 15:32:17, October 31, 2007 CET | From | Beluzian Workers Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Constitution (2477) |
| Message | Frankly, we grew tired of having a partisan monarch - the whole reason behind having a constitutional monarchy is that the head of state remains outside of politics. Zog was always partisan, and therefore not a true constitutional monarch. |
| Date | 15:36:45, October 31, 2007 CET | From | Constitutional Monarchy Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Constitution (2477) |
| Message | Perhaps he wasnt a traditional constitutional monarch. Technically he wasnt influencing politics directly, but it is know that he leads the PPP so I suppose that has a small amount of influence. Do i take it then that the Liberals do not oppose constitutional monarchies, only Zog, or a monarch who is not independent? |
| Date | 15:42:15, October 31, 2007 CET | From | Beluzian Workers Party | To | Debating the Amendment to the Constitution (2477) |
| Message | I would agree with that statement, yes. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 534 | |||||
| no | Total Seats: 216 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Parties have the ability to endorse another party's candidate for the Head of State election (if there is one). This adds a strategic element to the elections. |
| Random quote: "Anarchy stands for the liberation of the human mind from the domination of religion, the liberation of the human body from the domination of property, liberation from the shackles and restraints of government." - Emma Goldman |