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 June 2550
Details
Submitted by[?]: Solentian Populist Party
Status[?]: defeated
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: February 2551
Description[?]:
| To the leaders of the fine parties who supported the previous cabinet proposal: I apologize for the inconvenience of this entire situation. This time, I have taken measures to prevent the proposal from being killed by Federial Independent Party. Just as there is no place for their bad politics in Solentia, there is no place for the F.I.P. in my cabinet. In there place, I welcome the Autocratic Nationalist Front. They may be new here, but I have spoken with their leaders and they agree that Solentia is moving in a different direction than that of the F.I.P. and they will be willing to work with ALL OF US to keep our wonderful country running smoothly. Let's get this proposal passed and get on with the future. President Hillary Rodham |
Proposals
Article 1
As per the Constitution, the President chairs the cabinet.
Article 2
The responsibilites of Science and Technology will be conducted by the Autonomist Party of Solentia
Article 3
The responsibilites of Food and Agriculture will be conducted by the Solentian People Party
Article 4
The responsibilites of Environment and Tourism will be conducted by the Autonomist Party of Solentia
Article 5
The responsibilites of Trade and Industry will be conducted by the National Zeus Party
Article 6
The responsibilites of Foreign Affairs will be conducted by the Federal Republican Party
Article 7
The responsibilites of Internal Affairs will be conducted by the National Zeus Party
Article 8
The responsibilites of Finance will be conducted by the Federal Republican Party
Article 9
The responsibilites of Defence will be conducted by the Federal Republican Party
Article 10
The responsibilites of Justice will be conducted by the Meritocratic Alliance
Article 11
The responsibilites of Infrastructure and Transport will be conducted by the National Zeus Party
Article 12
The responsibilites of Health and Social Services will be conducted by the Solentian People Party
Article 13
The responsibilites of Education and Culture will be conducted by the National Zeus Party
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 04:54:00, March 24, 2008 CET | From | Federal Independent Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of June 2550 |
| Message | I should think that democratic ideals are about working to solve differences rather than reacting to one vote that we disagreed on and breaking off all relations. To do something like that is the opposite of democracy and bi-partisan politics. FIP Minority Leader Andrew Cuomo |
| Date | 04:54:06, March 24, 2008 CET | From | Federal Independent Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of June 2550 |
| Message | Indeed, it would seem there is quite a bit of controversy regarding this party's vote. I wonder to myself if it is to much use to argue against a bloc of parties that are so viciously partisan towards my party for little reason known to me, but this is the purpose of debate. However futile a cause may be, there is hope that democratic process will solve lingering errors. It is looked down upon that my party has voted to abstain from supporting this cabinet. Fellow party leadership has been reprimanded for choosing to make a decision regarding the politics before us. We have been scolded for voting in a fashion that was in our view, preferable. It has been a while since we have been told by another party that our vote was terribly wrong and errant. I see little purpose in listening to anyone who would tell us so, as they opted not to do the sensible thing: simply ask why. Anyone who would react as irrationally and in the spur of the moment as the opposition is not deserving of a credible lecture. To appease these parties, who very much have the right to know why we abstained, I shall answer why. This could have been much simpler, but we're already started down this path. First of all, my opponents claim that we have done nothing but oppose their legislation which they feel is for the benefit of the nation. In politics, the term "benefit of the nation" is not only extremely subjective and opinionated, but lacks true meaning unless it has facts supporting it. The United Democratic Party's legislation may been seen by its supporters and authors as integral reform, but that does not mean that all of us believe in that. Quite clearly, if we have opposed you as often as you state, then that is exemplary of difference in ideology. Secondly, moving on, what is wrong with my party having a difference in opinion? Is this not a democratic state where all are given the liberty to uphold their own ideals and beliefs? If it is, then we should be applauded for providing citizens with a rivalry viewpoint which allows for diversity in government. In a tyrannical dictatorship, however, a difference in opinion would be frowned upon and persecuted. While you have not endorsed the persecution of our beliefs, you have most certainly condemned them off the basis that they are different. Regarding the United Democratic Party's accusations that we wrongly utilize our right to abstain, I would ask them why this is to their belief. As members of this legislature, we are presented with three democratic forms of implementing our views. One is to show clear support, the other to oppose, and the last to demonstrate an unwillingness to agree to either side of the issue and to take a stance of neutrality. However, it would seem that having a position of neutrality is "childish, selfish behavior" according to my colleagues. We have the right to use our options, and if we choose to abstain, we should not be belittled for our decision. Obviously, it was our belief that the cabinet failed to meet the standards we wished it to. For a successful government coalition, all members should be in accordance to the presentation. That leads me to my next topic. We have received much scorn for abstaining from this cabinet. Let me explain why. In a cabinet, as long as I can remember, any parties included in a proposal should be informed of their inclusion. It is wrong to assume a party will automatically throw its support behind another's proposal simply because they are included within the new coalition. It would be a rather un-democratic thing to do. This, however, would be the case scenario presented to us. We were at random, given this to either support or to cast down. If we had supported, we would be giving permission to begin a new coalition that we disagreed with. If we had voted this down, we would have received even more attacks for our views and decisions. We chose the best of the three. We very much are happy that we were included in Ms. Rodham's proposal, but none-the-less, we disagreed with how it was constructed and its reasoning, mostly its reasoning. First of all, did you ever contact us and discuss the potential role our party was to be given in this new structured government? Did you ever bother to find out if we agreed to the seats divided amongst the other parties? Did you ever consider the roles each party was to play, and if this was the case, did you consider the strengths of the Federal Independent Party? Apparently not, for if you had, you would have asked us what our party has mainly specialized in while serving this nation. Unless you have done a comprehensive historical research centered on this party and its service to this great country, I doubt that you know what the Federal Independent Party's 160 year history is like. The opinion of other parties and their word do not count as credible material to us, as that is their biased view on us, whether it be negative or positive. If you truly did desire to work a bi-partisan cabinet and usher in a new era of politics, then you would have made a perfect example out of this opportune situation. You clearly did not do this. The Federal Independent Party has long served this nation. We are the founders of the Federal Republic and have worked to build an effective, bi-partisan relationship between the past and the new. We have done this quite well and have proven our ability to provide a veteran point of view to Solentian politics. If you are in disagreement with us over this statement, then please, simply say so. I would be happy to personally ask surviving party leaders that have worked with the Federal Independent Party to come and testify before this legislature and say for themselves our level of professionalism. We have solid reasoning for our decisions and most of the time are willing to compromise on every issue to suit the needs of this nation. The seats we were offered were almost offensive. I do not know how much you have learned about us, but we have been servicing this nation for a while. As the oldest party in the nation, we have seen every political tactic used and know what is the norm and what is not. The offers we received were anything but the norm and were spectacularly dismal. Depressing, if not that, worse. Environment and Tourism? As much as we have pro-ecologically friendly laws and value the department's worth, we find it sad that Ms. Rodham finds us only capable of handling tourists and the regulation of lumberjacks. In all the experience we hold, is it honestly true that you find us fit to work for these departments instead of the seats requiring great knowledge? We have served the Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Finance each for over sixty years. Over this span of time, we dealt with a terrorist attack upon Solentian soil, rebuilt Solentia's foreign relations among the international community, ended several cold wars, created a lubricated budget, implemented new and fair taxes, and have worked to see the soldiers in the Solentian Military thrive. We have served every seat in the cabinet at least once and have served a series of departments over the course of at least 50 years. We are the most experienced candidates and have proven our ability to govern this country effectively and peacefully. And while we very much respect Ms. Rodham's decision to instate in a new cabinet, we believe that this new cabinet will not suit the nation as well as another one could. We believe that our work in Finance, with the recent overhaul of the ruined budget and income tax bracket from the Conservative & Morality Party era, has proven itself useful. We created a running new budget which allocated funds to each department that needed it and foresaw the necessity for education, health care, and industrial funding. The nation has reverted from an anarchist budget to a lubricated, successful source of funding. These improvements have led to much needed reform, the same reform the United Democratic Party claims they wish to implement in Solentia's politics. We would be very much interested in debating and working to create a new cabinet to replace this older, more outdate one. However, that must be accompanied by reasoning, a willingness to work together with compromise, and discussion. We are opposed to immediately confirming a cabinet without any discussion. Also, we would appreciate actually being contacted to diplomatically negotiate a new government coalition. It is depressing that you claim our party is undiplomatic if you have never actually confronted us verbally until now. You have never spoken to us, but claim you have attempted to work with us again and again. This simply has not been the case, and you cannot lie and squirm your way out of this one. I never really realized that the Federal Independent Party is undiplomatic until now you mention it. However, instead of seeing what you speak of, I instead see a party that is willing to work democratically. We have not submitted to your demands and are now being punished by our colleagues, including the Federal Republican Party which we would have thought would have the knowledge to differentiate one unlikable vote from ending an entire political relationship. For standing for our values, we are seen to be one-sided. If that is true, then I would assume being one-sided is for the betterment of this nation. It is your decision to exclude us from the cabinet off of the reasoning you have provided us with. That is your choice Ms. Rodham and fellow United Democratic Party leadership, along with the Federal Republican Party's backing. However, I have presented what I feel is a reasonable outlook from our view and have decided not to use offensive terminology or baiting such as both of the oppositionists have. Instead, I will continue to advocated our belief and decision and will not crumble to the wishes of the opposition, who would clearly be much happier if only their side of the argument was presented and agreed to. If an incovenience has been incurred, then we apologize. However, democracy and democratic ideals of the allowance of differentiating opinions and acts has been stood for on this day. Thank you for your time and understanding. FIP President Jack Thyrenvall |
| Date | 05:11:55, March 24, 2008 CET | From | Meritocratic Alliance | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of June 2550 |
| Message | The SRNP representatives acknowledge and applaud the years of service done by the FIP in the past. Now is a time of great political uncertainty and upheaval. We must remember our roots, so that the republic remains. While division has its place in sowing allowing us to find the root of our discontents which lead to a better nation, I think it would be unwise to discredit the unusually verbose FIP on a small matter. It is understood from any observation of voting that the IP and FIP march lockstep in matters such as this, and where one is not involved, the other party will refrain from solidarity. So be it. For our part the SRNP is delighted to be acknowledged with inclusion into the cabinet and will be willing to work with parties both new and august in a spirit of reason and patriotism. We vote yea, although we do suggest in future cases that membership in such a cabinet be reduced to fewer members for reasons that may, in time, become obvious to our honored President. Dawid Morrax, SRNP Party Spokesperson |
| Date | 18:07:35, March 24, 2008 CET | From | Solentian People Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of June 2550 |
| Message | I no longer wish to be in a cabinet when I cannot agree with policy that infringes the rights of the many and takes care of the few. It is a pathetic way to govern and Hilary Rodham has to be the most incompetent President of modern times. Lady. Nancy Lawson- Candidate for Health Secretary Alan Cox- Candidate for Food and Agriculture Secretary |
| Date | 18:19:13, March 24, 2008 CET | From | Solentian Populist Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of June 2550 |
| Message | Your decision will be honored. Forgive me for trying to work with you despite our core differences and to give your party representation. I grow tired of proposing a new cabinet every time I turn around. I'll take the advice of the experienced and knowledgeable Solentian Radical Nationalist Party and only include those parties willing to be civil in my cabinet. Good day. President Rodham |
| Date | 19:42:41, March 24, 2008 CET | From | Solentian Populist Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of June 2550 |
| Message | From the Office of President Rodham: As much as I would love to release a detailed response to lengthy statement of the Federal Independent Party, I simply cannot do so at this time. Countless pivotal bills are being discussed and voted upon in the legislature, my presidency has been challenged, and there are just far too many more important issues at the moment. When timing permits it, I will respond to the detailed statement of FIP President Jack Thyrenvall. In the mean time, I will say this: I do not agree with the recent behavior of the FIP; however, I have the utmost admiration for their party, its history, and their many, many accomplishments over the years... and I genuinely hope that problems such as this do not continue to arise. President Rodham |
| Date | 01:37:32, March 25, 2008 CET | From | Federal Republican Party | To | Debating the Cabinet Proposal of June 2550 |
| Message | Respectfully, The S.R.N.P. is absolutely correct. There is a new era upon Solentia; and we are in times of change and perhaps even revolution. This is clearly why the F.I.P. the I.P. and the P.P. have recently put their feet in the ground to stop progress in our proud Republic. It is progress, it is a movement, it is a change and you-my once respected colleagues are the establishment and are at the present. If you listen closely my colleagues you can even hear it, yes-the last gasp of the establishment! Our party has already released publically our sentiments on the People’s Party near treasonous tone and behavior under Mr. Black’s tenure and will not comment further upon this here. The P.P. voted for this identical cabinet and then chose to vote no, for reason that no doubt they cannot explain with any degree of logic. It’s a true shame to see such a once proud party in total disarray. I must disagree with one item mentioned by our dear friends from the S.R.N.P. and that is the long and commendable record of the F.I.P. They’ve done nothing but go against the desires of the nation’s voters and pander directly to vital interests to gain seats and nothing else. Much like the People Party opposing elections when seats are empty as to remain in power, another crime against the citizens of Solentia. Furthermore, tenure of the F.I.P. the C.M.P. and the P.P. we’ve not seen a change in our federal budget in over a decade. We’ve not seen a treaty signed or drafted in decades. We’ve had a Foreign Minister for decades who must citizens could name out of a total invisibility of our Ministers. It is indeed, time for a change. Specifically to the Federal Independent Party, I truly do not have the time to break down your clearly flawed statements and logic in your actions. Your behavior stuns the F.R.P. beyond any belief. You accuse our President of unprecedented partisanship yet in your next breath you attack a so-called platitude on the topic of your near universal votes against progress in recent years; along with the I.P. You try and explain why you abstained from a cabinet proposal yet you vote no on the next identical one-minus you being in it? Yet, we’re the partisans? Do any of my colleagues see through the smoke the Federal Independents are blowing up our rears? I commend the National Zeus Party, United Democratic Party, Autocratic Party and our friends the S.R.N.P. in working together these last few years to reform this government; and to work collectively on proposal adjustments. It has been refreshing. If the other parties present wish to drag their feet in the mud; they can. For now however, as a united bloc on varied sides of the political spectrum we can work together to make this nation better and the P.P; F.I.P. and I.P. can’t do a thing about it. It’s time for the latter of my colleagues to consider their positions and tones. The elections are a ways off my friends, and with this behavior-you won’t be winning any popularity contests with your other colleagues. Delivered By, Administrator Edward ‘Tipp’ Wagner on Behalf of Chairman Naveed |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 250 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 175 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: Moderation will not approve a Cultural Protocol request within the first 48 hours of it being requested. This is in order to give other players a chance to query the proposed changes, if they wish to do so. Moderation may be approached for advice on a proposed change, but any advice proffered should always be understood under the provisio that no final decision will be made until at least 48 hours after the request has been formally submitted for approval. |
| Random quote: "Changing the way we measure things is vital. So is decompartmentalising society making sure that economics and politics are not divorced from other crucial areas of life." - David Attenborough |