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: Gambling Legalization Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: Jakanian Conservative Party
Status[?]: passed
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: July 2118
Description[?]:
| A Bill to Legalize smaller occurences of gambling |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The right to gamble.
Old value:: Gambling is illegal.
Current: Gambling is illegal.
Proposed: Gambling is legal, but only in private homes and casinos with special licences.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 02:38:17, September 28, 2005 CET | From | Jakanian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Gambling Legalization Act |
| Message | (This is how a bill should work, correct?) I do not see how something as small as gambling should be completely illegal |
| Date | 03:03:32, September 28, 2005 CET | From |  Islamic Nationalist Front | To | Debating the Gambling Legalization Act |
| Message | (Yup.) Agreed. The Jakanian Capitalist Party feels that this bill is a step in the first firection and will vote in support of it. However, we feel that an individual has the absolute freedom to choose what to do with his income. Furthrmore, we assert that special licences for casinos merely create monopolies where otherwise competition would ensure higher quality and lower costs for consumers. Any costs incurred by a consumer as a result of fraud (getting ripped off) can be settled as a civil case and the cost of such civil suits should be enough to deter unregulated individuals and organizations from comitting fraud. We, therefore, suggest the proposal be changed to include "no regulation what so ever," or ask for at least support should the Party propose such legislation. |
| Date | 03:33:54, September 28, 2005 CET | From | Jakanian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Gambling Legalization Act |
| Message | The Free Republican Party of Jakania thanks the Jakanian Capitalist party for their suggestions and shall act to change the bill shortly. |
| Date | 06:09:36, September 28, 2005 CET | From | Nudist Party of United Jakania | To | Debating the Gambling Legalization Act |
| Message | I disagree as gambling is an addiction that is detrimental to the economy of the individual and leads to a breakdown of the family unit. THe Nudist Party cannot support gambling |
| Date | 12:02:13, September 28, 2005 CET | From | Islamic Nationalist Front | To | Debating the Gambling Legalization Act |
| Message | The LP asserts that any "breakdown of the family unit" that results from gambling would be a social problem and, therefore, not the concern of the government. Those individuals who feel a moral obligation to assist gambling addicts should be free to do so, as in the case of drug addicts. Making gambling illegal also pushes a legitimate business underground, resulting in black market transactions that the government cannot keep track of or tax. Criminalizing gambling also increase the incentive for fraud (if an illegal casino rips you off, you won't sue it because then you'll be arrested for gambling). The LP further notes that legislating morality by banning gambling, as the Nudist Party suggests, would be no better than banning nudity, which is typically outlawed for similar "moral" reasons (Think of the children!) |
| Date | 13:44:36, September 28, 2005 CET | From | Nudist Party of United Jakania | To | Debating the Gambling Legalization Act |
| Message | The NP concedes the LP on the point of regulating morality, but respectfully defends the position that gambling is not a moral issue. Gambling, like drugs, is an addiction issue. And as such should not be supported by the government. We, as representatives of our people, feel a "moral" obligation to at least abstain from a bill that supports or encourages an addiction. We feel our constituincy would prefer us to object to governmental support of a potentially hazardous addiction. Legalizing gambling would not eliminate the addiction, nor would it eliminate the criminal aspect of gambling. As conservatives, we cannot in good conscious support this proposal. |
| Date | 14:48:40, September 28, 2005 CET | From | Islamic Nationalist Front | To | Debating the Gambling Legalization Act |
| Message | The Jakanian Libertarian Party then requests that the Nudist Party abstain from voting on this bill. |
| Date | 15:40:16, September 28, 2005 CET | From | Jakanian Liberal Socialists | To | Debating the Gambling Legalization Act |
| Message | The JLSP agrees that gambling should be legalised to further personal choice and freedom of our citizens, but we also share some of the NP's concerns. Gambling can lead to addiction, and we can not afford to have parties taking advantage of this fact. We have a duty to protect our citizens from exploitation and fraud. Can we include some form of licensing in the bill? |
| Date | 17:21:40, September 28, 2005 CET | From | Islamic Nationalist Front | To | Debating the Gambling Legalization Act |
| Message | Jakanian Liberal Socialists: Licensing was part of the original proposal. The Free Republican Party changed the Act to include no regulation on the LP's suggestion. Please refer to that message for clarification as to why licensing or any other form of regulation would be a poor policy. |
| Date | 01:36:38, September 29, 2005 CET | From | Jakanian Conservative Party | To | Debating the Gambling Legalization Act |
| Message | If the Libertarian Party would consider supporting liscensed gambling, the Free Republicans will support the military service legislation |
| Date | 03:17:14, September 29, 2005 CET | From | Islamic Nationalist Front | To | Debating the Gambling Legalization Act |
| Message | (Done and done.) |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 56 | ||||
| no | Total Seats: 12 | ||||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 32 |
| Random fact: In Culturally Protected nations, it is the responsibility of players to ensure the candidate boxes on their Party Overview screens are filled in with appropriate names. If a player is allotted seats in a Cabinet bill and has not filled in names for the relevant candidate position, then the program will automatically fill in the positions with names which might not necessarily be appropriate for the Cultural Protocols. |
| Random quote: "Since a politician never believes what he says, he is quite surprised to be taken at his word." Charles De Gaulle (1890 - 1970) |