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: Agriculture Adjustment Bill of 2551
Details
Submitted by[?]: Federal Republican Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: March 2553
Description[?]:
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change
Scope of food ingredient labeling (if present).
Old value:: All ingredients and corresponding nutritional information must be listed.
Current: Only the major ingredients need to be listed.
Proposed: Only the major ingredients and those with specific labelling requirements must be listed.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Food safety policy.
Old value:: The government introduces, and actively enforces, food standards provisions.
Current: The government introduces, and actively enforces, food standards provisions.
Proposed: Local governments determine food safety standards.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The government's stance on vaccinations.
Old value:: The government mandates vaccination for all children, but parents may opt out for religious or ideological reasons.
Current: The government encourages vaccinations for children, but does not enforce them.
Proposed: The government encourages vaccinations for children, but does not enforce them.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 03:36:09, March 26, 2008 CET | From | Federal Republican Party | To | Debating the Agriculture Adjustment Bill of 2551 |
| Message | Dossier # 1021 - From the Offices of The Federal Republican Party; The Central Committee for Strategic Planning within the F.R.P. desires the opinions of our colleagues on this measure. Thank you. Delivered on the Floor on Behalf of Administrator Edward 'Tipp' Wagner |
| Date | 04:10:12, March 26, 2008 CET | From | Solentian Populist Party | To | Debating the Agriculture Adjustment Bill of 2551 |
| Message | Respectfully, The United Democratic Party will not support this legislation. Regarding Article 1, the United Democratic Party feels that vaccinations are necessary to insure the safety of our future generations. Regarding Article 2, we feel that the national government has done a more than adequate job at introducing and enforcing food standards. As far as Article 3 goes, we believe that Solentians have a right to know each and every ingredient in the foods they consume. These are examples of issues that we are not able to support without going against our guiding principles. Sincerely, President Hillary Rodham, Chair of the United Democratic Party |
| Date | 04:13:11, March 26, 2008 CET | From | National Zeus Party | To | Debating the Agriculture Adjustment Bill of 2551 |
| Message | We must agree with the UDP on this issue. |
| Date | 05:44:58, March 26, 2008 CET | From | Federal Republican Party | To | Debating the Agriculture Adjustment Bill of 2551 |
| Message | Dossier # 1022 from the F.R.P. Headquarters From the Desk of Administrator, Edward 'Tipp' Wagner, We respect our colleagues replies and thoughts. It is no newsflash to the F.R.P. that neither of you always sit on our side of the fence. In the spirit of bipartisanship however, the Chairman Naveed has encouraged me to make a defense of this proposal in the hopes of a re-consideration or perhaps tit for a tat. . . Article One: We agree with both of our esteemed colleagues that mandated shots upon children would prevent potential problems later in life. Though my friends, I encourage you to investigate the links and rise of Autism in children 1 in 100; and it's been linked to vaccinations. . .This is not a mater of political spin it is fact. It is the fundamental belief of the Federal Republican Party that the government ought not tell parents how to parent. If a parent desires to pose their children to the risks one either side; let them-we live in a free society. Article Two and Three: Both of these measures let loose the belt on our food industry. It does not pose any risks to the public, whatsoever by the new proposed laws. Read them carefully my friends and consider the options. It is flat-out the position of the F.R.P. to deregulate our enormous bloated federal government. Respectfully, C.C.S.P on Behalf of the F.R.P. |
| Date | 16:39:41, March 26, 2008 CET | From | Meritocratic Alliance | To | Debating the Agriculture Adjustment Bill of 2551 |
| Message | We must regretfully oppose this bill. |
| Date | 18:57:45, March 26, 2008 CET | From | Federal Republican Party | To | Debating the Agriculture Adjustment Bill of 2551 |
| Message | Respectfully, To our dear friends of the S.R.N.P. what is it you find in this proposal that you can not see eye to eye with? This is why it is in debate; an open forum for you to voice your concerns. And in the spirit of bipartisanship, the F.R.P. as the sponser is willing to hear them out in their entirety. Signed, Administrator, E. 'Tipp' Wagner |
| Date | 19:14:30, March 26, 2008 CET | From | Meritocratic Alliance | To | Debating the Agriculture Adjustment Bill of 2551 |
| Message | We believe in enforced vaccinations. A few throwbacks should not allow the disease to find fertile soil. Our own findings has been local government consistently does not inspect food properly. Finally we see the listing of nutritional content as beneficial for fit and healthy citizens of the motherland. |
| Date | 19:20:49, March 26, 2008 CET | From | Federal Republican Party | To | Debating the Agriculture Adjustment Bill of 2551 |
| Message | Respectfully, With utmost respect to our colleague, would you like it if the government forced you to vaccinate your children if there was a serious risk involved with the medication? I think not. Our stance on research on medications and such and your fear of a major plague or whatnot spreading is valid but, in this era irrelevant in the view of the F.R.P. It may be your belief that local governments consistently have shortfalls on inspections however, I can easily point to failures on the federal level as well. This is a complex issue. Would you rather shoulder these responsibilities and liabilities on place the burden on state governments whom better can adapt to the demands in real-time. Furthermore, this is a states-rights issue and whether or not you believe the federal government can do a better job than our local elected officials can. On Article Three, we will drop this if you could support the other measures. . . Signed, Deputy Director of Health and Social Services, Julitta Gwenaëlle |
| Date | 19:37:24, March 26, 2008 CET | From | Autonomist Party of Solentia | To | Debating the Agriculture Adjustment Bill of 2551 |
| Message | Our opinions on article 1 and 2 are well established, but we would like to inform our fellow parties that the Autocratic Nationalist Front favors all things that spur growth in the economy and by removing the strict rules on current labeling we would allow another sector of our market to expand greatly. This Article would reduce labeling requirements, but not remove important information that consumers need to know. After the last several debates and bills I'm beginning to believe that some of our government leaders have various issues with reading comprehension. |
| Date | 14:05:19, March 28, 2008 CET | From | Autonomist Party of Solentia | To | Debating the Agriculture Adjustment Bill of 2551 |
| Message | It appears the FRP has changed this bill slightly, so that the voters who don't care what the people think may pass it. Fortunately it wasn't changed so much that the ANF can't support it still. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes | Total Seats: 163 | ||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 262 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: The players in a nation have a collective responsibility to ensure their "Bills under debate" section is kept in good order. Bills which are irrelevant or have become irrelevant should be deleted. Deletion can be requested for bills proposed by inactive parties on the Bill Clearout Requests thread: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4363 |
| Random quote: "A theory that seems to explain everything is just as good at explaining nothing"- Christopher Hitchens |