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: Constitution reform
Details
Submitted by[?]: Communist Party (marxist-deleonist)
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: March 2595
Description[?]:
| We need this reform, so the Chancellor wouldn´t be able to veto the government cabinet proposals |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Structure of the executive branch.
Old value:: The Head of State is also Head of Government.
Current: The Head of State and Head of Government are two separate officials.
Proposed: The Head of State and Head of Government are two separate officials.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 23:21:45, June 02, 2008 CET | From |  Progressive Liberal Party | To | Debating the Constitution reform |
| Message | This change was discussed before, and rejected before even being formulated as a bill because the Head of State would then just be a figurehead. Speaking OOC, and given that there are no options like presidential decrees, snap elections and other powers usually associated with a directly-elected Head of State, be it executive or not, having the highest office in the country would be useless in terms of power. Thus we the Progressive Liberals support the current redaction of the article, which in effect gives the Chancellor a veto over any government proposed. Besides, as this bill entails an amendment to the Constitution, it requires 2/3 in favor. Since 70 Senators pledge their allegiance to the JLC, the maximum vote without them, even with every other party in favor, would be 105, far short of the required 117. Do you really think that the League will vote to strip an office they control of most of its powers? |
| Date | 01:11:46, June 03, 2008 CET | From | Cildanian Workers Coalition | To | Debating the Constitution reform |
| Message | The CWC have been in favour of this bill - but we need to wait until we have the 2/3 needed. |
| Date | 15:40:18, June 03, 2008 CET | From | Justice League of Cildania | To | Debating the Constitution reform |
| Message | Typical socialist tin-pot tyrants. You can't get the public to like you enough so you change the rules to get your way anyway. Like we've said time and again we would gladly include interested parties into the cabinet, you just need to propose it and give us our due. But if you are dead set on ousting the party that most of the voters want in there, you can always just fix an election... get a few parties together and back one candidate. It's easy with a little organization. |
| Date | 11:26:48, June 20, 2008 CET | From | Cildanian Workers Coalition | To | Debating the Constitution reform |
| Message | I think it's safe to say that any constitutional ammedments that need to be made will now get through - dont you? |
| Date | 13:15:51, June 20, 2008 CET | From | Progressive Liberal Party | To | Debating the Constitution reform |
| Message | Er... well, we still keep our objections about a figurehead HoS. |
| Date | 14:51:02, June 20, 2008 CET | From | Justice League of Cildania | To | Debating the Constitution reform |
| Message | What happens when the CWC or communists win the election, and you've completely castrated the position? |
| Date | 15:44:35, June 20, 2008 CET | From | Cildanian Workers Coalition | To | Debating the Constitution reform |
| Message | For the record, the CWC believe that their should be a divorce of the two positions. The tyranny that this country has had for the last 200 years and the fact that the JLC *have* to agree with every government that has been raised can not be democratic. |
| Date | 18:03:59, June 20, 2008 CET | From | Progressive Liberal Party | To | Debating the Constitution reform |
| Message | It is since the Chancellor is democratically and periodically elected - Cildania is right now under a semipresidential form of government, in which an elected Head of State has veto power over the cabinet. We find it a logical form of government, even in real life, so the HoS could block "strange" coalitions made possible by floor crossers et al. However, we also think that the Head of State should be understanding of the people's wishes, and thus he or (as of currently) she may have to concede a government in which her party has no posts, simply because other parties in the Senate have reached an agreement to form a cabinet commanding a majority of the legislature. This is both a criticism to the JLC as an advise to the new CNP chancellor. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 46 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 75 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 54 |
| Random fact: Moderation will not accept Cultural Protocol updates which introduce, on a significant scale, cultures which are likely to be insufficiently accessible to players. In particular, for all significant cultures in Particracy, it should be easy for players to access and use online resources to assist with language translation and the generation of character names. Moderation reserves the right to amend Cultural Protocols which are deemed to have introduced significant cultures that are not sufficiently accessible and which are not being actively role-played with. |
| Random quote: "An independent is someone who wants to take the politics out of politics." - Adlai Stevenson |