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: Tenno Mssrvy Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Normand Pluralist 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 2502
Description[?]:
| This bill is named after former Tenno Mssrvy, to acknowledge his (short) accomplishment. We propose that the method of cabinet proposal be made slightly more flexible. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The constitutional right and responsibility to propose a cabinet to the legislature.
Old value:: Only the largest party can propose a cabinet.
Current: Each party can propose a cabinet coalition.
Proposed: Only the Head of State can propose a cabinet coalition.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 09:55:44, December 17, 2007 CET | From | Normand Pluralist Party | To | Debating the Tenno Mssrvy Bill |
| Message | We believe this bill will require more cooperation among the various parties of Sekowo. We believe that more cooperation among the parties of Sekowo would be a good thing. |
| Date | 10:03:28, December 17, 2007 CET | From | Pan-Sekowo Freedom Alliance | To | Debating the Tenno Mssrvy Bill |
| Message | Why will it promote more cooperation? |
| Date | 10:09:30, December 17, 2007 CET | From | Normand Pluralist Party | To | Debating the Tenno Mssrvy Bill |
| Message | Because acheiving the office of Tenno will become more significant, and so parties will see more of a need to support eachother in electing the Tenno. |
| Date | 10:10:06, December 17, 2007 CET | From | Normand Pluralist Party | To | Debating the Tenno Mssrvy Bill |
| Message | (Therefore there will be more negotiating amongst parties to figure out who to support, etc.) |
| Date | 10:44:07, December 17, 2007 CET | From | Pan-Sekowo Freedom Alliance | To | Debating the Tenno Mssrvy Bill |
| Message | This will put government essentially in hte hands of parties, not in the hands of the people. We feel having the largest party do it is more directly democratic. |
| Date | 14:55:10, December 17, 2007 CET | From | Normand Pluralist Party | To | Debating the Tenno Mssrvy Bill |
| Message | Directly democratic? A party with less than 20% of the popular vote gets to dictate the cabinet, currently. This way, there will be encouragement for coalitions to be built with much more widespread support. We have a feeling certain parties are opposing this bill out of spite. |
| Date | 19:37:26, December 17, 2007 CET | From | 帝国公明党 (Teikoku Kōmeitō) | To | Debating the Tenno Mssrvy Bill |
| Message | No. Historically there have been more different parties that hold the title of largest party than there have been different heads of state, point in fact the HDLP held the office of Head of State for five consecutive elections, lost once and than had another three consecutive term run. |
| Date | 01:07:20, December 18, 2007 CET | From | Pan-Sekowo Freedom Alliance | To | Debating the Tenno Mssrvy Bill |
| Message | There is no spite in our actions on voting for this bill, we just think it would be wrong for Sekowo, for the reasons we stated as well as DSP's excellent reasoning. We wish the NPP would act less paranoid. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 102 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 461 | |||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 187 |
| Random fact: If your "Bills under debate" section is cluttered up with old bills created by inactive parties, report them for deletion on the Bill Clearouts Requests thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4363 |
| Random quote: "I don’t have facts to back this up." - Herman Cain |