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: Proposal Amendment
Details
Submitted by[?]: Rightist Party
Status[?]: defeated
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: December 2482
Description[?]:
| This will change the proposal quota number from 5 back up to 15. It is rediculous to have such a low number. |
Proposals
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 00:22:08, November 05, 2007 CET |
From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | It helps to dissuade ridiculously long bills. It requires more active involvement in the game. I fail to see the down side. |
| Date | 01:39:23, November 05, 2007 CET |
From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | The downside is that for new parties...it takes forever to get their voices out there. As we just recently rejoined the Tukarali Political Scene, we were hampered in what we could propose. As to long bills, those are actually rare in the grand scheme of things. No. This hampers a party's right to put bills on the table. |
| Date | 02:40:48, November 05, 2007 CET |
From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | It does not. A party is still able to propose as many bills as they could before. They must propose them throughout the year, rather than 15 bills all at once. That is the only difference. |
| Date | 03:04:12, November 05, 2007 CET |
From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | And what if it is getting close to election day? This is not the way we should have things set up. The proposed is how it should be. All you want to do is stifle people's right to create laws. |
| Date | 03:36:37, November 05, 2007 CET |
From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | Bills can still be proposed close to the elections. They just cannot be voted on. Perhaps your party should learn more about the legislative system before making accusations about "stifling rights". |
| Date | 05:04:55, November 05, 2007 CET |
From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | We're quite aware that your party is much older than ours. That doesn't change the fact that you raised an irrelevant point. |
| Date | 19:53:02, November 05, 2007 CET |
From | Flemish Liberation Front | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | comon now kids... this is a discussion about who of you two is the biggest shitgeek... lets call it a draw... :-O |
| Date | 20:12:52, November 05, 2007 CET |
From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | When someone makes a claim...they have to back it up. the JUP is failing in this regard. |
| Date | 22:02:59, November 05, 2007 CET |
From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | That you can still put forward proposals close to elections? How does that need to be backed up. It's true. |
| Date | 00:37:58, November 06, 2007 CET |
From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | You know that proposals gets players visibility up right? Well when you have a limited number of proposals (like 5) their visibility will be practicly nothing. Now we increase it to say 15, now they have the ability to increase their visibility quickly.
It all comes down to visibility JUP. Leaving it at 5 does nothing for visibility. That is why we want to increase it. It is to increase visibility for everyone. |
| Date | 06:40:54, November 06, 2007 CET |
From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | It simply means that a party cannot propose 15 proposals all at once. Their proposals would have to be staggered over a period. Do you not understand that this bill won't change the number of proposals a party can put forward? That is changed by the other bill your party is proposing. |
| Date | 15:36:28, November 06, 2007 CET |
From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | Do you also realize how rare it is to have a bill 15 proposals long? We've had a few of them and they were subsequently broken up unless they all dealt with the same topic matter. |
| Date | 05:42:03, November 07, 2007 CET |
From | Judicial Union Party | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | It did occur, before your party became active again. The bill was not broken up, despite requests and demands. |
| Date | 06:26:52, November 07, 2007 CET |
From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | I would have done so and so would other people I can name along with parties. Do not punish others for the mistake of one person. |
| Date | 17:53:04, November 07, 2007 CET |
From | Greenish Liberal Democratic Socialists | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | I believe the JUP hints at a party (who's name escapes me at the moment) who proposed a couple of bills with multiple proposals in it, which he called "party program" or something alike. |
| Date | 20:21:30, November 07, 2007 CET |
From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Proposal Amendment | | Message | I just figured it was the FLF because of the way he acts. Anyways...it matters not. People here seem to love restrictions. |
subscribe to this discussion -
unsubscribeVoting
| Vote |
Seats |
| yes | Total Seats: 110 |
| no | Total Seats: 389 |
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: When your party holds the foreign affairs department, you can create new treaties. However, before writing anything new, it is a good idea to search for existing treaties which already accomplish what you desire. |
| Random quote: "Politics is all about compromises and negotiations, nothing more, nothing less." - Augusto Amadeo, former Istalian politician |