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: Cabinet Proposal of July 2038
Details
Submitted by[?]: Patriot Party
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This bill presents the formation of a cabinet. It requires more than half of the legislature to vote yes. Traditionally, parties in the proposal vote yes, others (the opposition) vote no. This bill will pass as soon as the required yes votes are in and all parties in the proposal have voted yes, or will be defeated if unsufficient votes are reached on the deadline.
Voting deadline: April 2039
Description[?]:
| My 3rd attempt at forming a cabinet. Please let me know if it approves so I can put it to vote. |
Proposals
Article 1
The responsibilites of Head of Government will be conducted by the Social Dynamist Party
Article 2
The responsibilites of Science and Technology will be conducted by the 3wide.com Antiparticulates
Article 3
The responsibilites of Foreign Affairs will be conducted by the Patriot Party
Article 4
The responsibilites of Internal Affairs will be conducted by the
Article 5
The responsibilites of Finance will be conducted by the
Article 6
The responsibilites of Defence will be conducted by the
Article 7
The responsibilites of Justice will be conducted by the Social Dynamist Party
Article 8
The responsibilites of Infrastructure and Transport will be conducted by the Social Dynamist Party
Article 9
The responsibilites of Health and Social Services will be conducted by the 3wide.com Antiparticulates
Article 10
The responsibilites of Education and Culture will be conducted by the Social Dynamist Party
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | not recorded | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | ok, I guess no one wants to debate thisbill |
| Date | not recorded | From | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | I was considering it, actually |
| Date | not recorded | From |  Communist Party of Endralon | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | This coalition is formed of all the parties in your nation's parliament. That is absurd. YOU SHOULD HAVE AN OPPOSITION! There are 3 large parties in your parliament. Realistically, only two of them should be in the coalition. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | Thank you for considering it Tukaralian Moderate Party. I am hoping that this proposal actually passes. Our nation needs a cabinet. |
| Date | not recorded | From | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | We've been doing fine so far without one. I'm going to vote no on this, and wait to see what is offered after the PGCA is approved in a few months. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | I believe its already been approved. Its just waiting for the time to expire |
| Date | not recorded | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | No one likes anything I do. I try to come up with a government and all I get is flak. This represents how the parliment votes. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | Again, a 100% government, no opposition. At least one sitting party needs to be in opposition, and with 8 parties, albeit with maayanster apparently inactive, I'm sure we can do better (especially given the proposer has elsewhere worried about alienating minority parties). Two or three sitting parties, depending on political similarity, and perhaps a non-sitting party (if one presents itself) would make for a reasonable form of government. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | Make up your mind SDP! I do as you requested now your saying I should have one non-sitting parliment member? You should've said that earlier. Make up your mind. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | If you're read what I'd said, I did indeed suggest a nonparliament member - and my comment just now was merely pointing out that you'd complained that the constitutional bill was excluding non-sitting parties! Let's see what that bill turns up with tomorrow. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | Ah, what the hell, it's getting late here. We have an election soon enough, and I suppose it is technically representative. Cabinets have little ingame point, and we're working well enough on our own agendas. As the site says, it's going to be awkward first time, and I can't be bothered to argue any longer. But once the election is over, we need to form cabinets based on real politics. And that means everyone posting proper party descriptions. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | By voting yes, I'm effectively giving either of the other two main parties an option to agree. Which effectively means abstaining while I'm away overnight. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Freedom Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | Alrighty, a 50-50 split. Joy. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Inactive | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | Though I have no power to sway it either way, I symbolicly palce my vote for yes. |
| Date | not recorded | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | I agree Freedom party |
| Date | not recorded | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of July 2038 |
| Message | I agree Freedom party |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 71 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 0 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: "Kubrk" is a Jelbic word that has the colloquial meaning "old man" or "geezer". |
| Random quote: "Conservative, n: A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from the Liberal who wishes to replace them with others." - Ambrose Bierce |