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: Ecology Decentralization Act
Details
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: November 2619
Description[?]:
| These are not matters of the federal government, and the federal government can't make a single law regarding these matters that will suit every community or area. These laws are best handled by local governments. It lets people make laws that suit their communities and families specific needs. It is preposterous and inefficient to have the federal government interfering with these things. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy on tree plantation.
Old value:: The government requires tree plantation at replacement level for all logging or clearance operations.
Current: The government requires tree plantation at higher than replacement levels for all logging or clearance operations.
Proposed: Local governments may set plantation policy.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Waste disposal responsibility.
Old value:: Waste disposal is left entirely to the private sector and is unregulated.
Current: The government is responsible for waste disposal.
Proposed: It is the responsibility of local governments to decide on waste disposal regulation.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change The government's stance on whaling.
Old value:: Commercial whaling is legal, but the government establishes whaling quotas.
Current: Commercial whaling is legal, but the government establishes whaling quotas.
Proposed: Local governments decide about whaling.
Article 4
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding the keeping of wild animals as pets.
Old value:: Wild animals may be kept as pets; the owners of dangerous wild animals must take the necessary measures to ensure they can't escape.
Current: The ownership of wild animals as pets is banned.
Proposed: This matter is left up to the local governments.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 04:29:50, August 10, 2008 CET | From | Party | To | Debating the Ecology Decentralization Act |
| Message | We would also like to point out, particularily to the Libertarian parties, that when "It is the responsibility of local governments to decide on waste disposal regulation." is stated, it does not mean that local governments HAVE to regulate waste disposal, it just means that the people of local areas should be able to make their own laws regarding it, and if the people of specific area want their local government to regulate it, its their business, and if the people of another area want it to be completely private, its their business. |
| Date | 04:33:33, August 10, 2008 CET | From | Party | To | Debating the Ecology Decentralization Act |
| Message | Its called self-governence, and is essential to freedom and liberty, having the federal government tell everybody in every community what all of their laws are is neither freedom or liberty. |
| Date | 06:28:40, August 10, 2008 CET | From | Sons of Liberty | To | Debating the Ecology Decentralization Act |
| Message | Yes, no, yes, no, in that order. We will abstain. Also, a regulation is a regulation. That's like saying, "It's the responsibilty of local governments to determine the legality of murder" means that it's alright to allow murder so long as it's locally allowed. The same goes for theft in taxes, regulation on business or on individual liberty. Freedom and liberty are ideas that apply to the individual, not the subejctive contractual abstractions of 'societies' or governments. If 99% of the people in a town vote to muder the one man against, it's no less injustice and illegal to kill him, regardless of if the rest of the people democratically decided so. And we will not allow the majority to hurt the minority, thus our position of constant favor towards sweeping guarentees of liberty so that smaller governments don't step on toes while the national looks the other way. |
| Date | 08:15:29, August 10, 2008 CET | From | Dranland First Party (CC) | To | Debating the Ecology Decentralization Act |
| Message | We stongly support this legislation and have no reservations whatsoever. |
| Date | 18:32:22, August 10, 2008 CET | From | Party | To | Debating the Ecology Decentralization Act |
| Message | We do NOT believe in the abolishment of the central state, we are strongly opposed to that, and we believe that murder should be illegal, everywhere. We just believe the federal governments role should be very small. And laws such as ecology regulation, cannot be so made so extreme, no matter who regulates it, because it is not an extremely drastic issue that deals with human lives, like murder is. So there is no need for the federal government to regulate people's communities like that. You are taking what we propose and bringing it to extremes that you know we do not believe in. We believe EVERY citizen of the nation should have certian fundemental rights, such as the right to life, liberty, and the security of the person, freedom of speech, the right to keep and bear arms, and other fundemental rights that you would know of, (I'm not going to list them all). And beside's that, we believe that most laws should be left up to local governments. We agree, that if there were no central government, there would be chaos, but we also realize, that having a strong central government takes away the people's right of self-governence, we are by no means extremists here, you are the extremist, as you believe in completely taking away every bit of power local areas have to make laws that suit THEIR communities, and THEIR families. Not the FEDERAL governments communities or families. |
| Date | 18:37:41, August 10, 2008 CET | From | Party | To | Debating the Ecology Decentralization Act |
| Message | We believe very strongly in individual liberty, but we are very weary of how self-centered these libertarians are, they care more about pleasing themselves, than they care about their community. Its all about me, me, me, me with these liberatarians, they care nothing for other people. Selfish is the word I would use to describe them. |
| Date | 18:38:58, August 10, 2008 CET | From | Party | To | Debating the Ecology Decentralization Act |
| Message | And that is why vulture-capitalism is a dangerougs thing that we are strongly against. We are strong against any form of communism, but we would not consider ourselves capitalists at all. |
| Date | 23:42:52, August 10, 2008 CET | From | Sons of Liberty | To | Debating the Ecology Decentralization Act |
| Message | Nothing can be morally greater than selfishness; it is a virtue that keeps mankind happy on the smallest scale. Happy individuals, happy society. Community and society are subjective and inferior to the rights of the individual. |
| Date | 10:35:14, August 11, 2008 CET | From | Progressive Right-Wing Party (PRWP) | To | Debating the Ecology Decentralization Act |
| Message | "Progressive rightwinger" probably describes me better than libertarian, but if I would have to choose between libertarians and conservatives, I would definetly choose libertarian. I think the conservatives are the self-centered, if they think that one way of life is better than another, they want to force everyone to live as they see best. A few examples: prostitution, cannabis, pornography, homosexuality, flag desecration... etc. I think that smoking isn't a very smart choice, still I don't want to outlaw smoking. Can you understand why? |
| Date | 13:00:51, August 11, 2008 CET | From | Sons of Liberty | To | Debating the Ecology Decentralization Act |
| Message | Hear hear to the PRWP. The idea that just because one doesn't like something, nobody should be allowed is one of the greatest evils about. As much as I abhor the idea of intoxication, and feel it a fool's folly, I feel there is no reason for those who wish to do so to be not allowed such. It does not hurt me. This is my issue with the conservative side of things. This belief that if others see prostitutes, if others do drugs or are homosexual, that this then will preclude them from living lives according to their own morals. This moral injunction on behalf of society as they see it is of such cruelty that we cannot fathom why this cannot be seen as the unsensible self-righteous tyranny that it is. |
| Date | 17:00:05, August 11, 2008 CET | From | Party | To | Debating the Ecology Decentralization Act |
| Message | We do not seek to outlaw smoking or alcohol. We just see no reason for not letting local area's make their own laws concerning them. If a community wants to outlaw them, they should be allowed to, why force every community to except something that nobody in the community wants. Let's say there is a community, and they do not have problems drinking alcohol, and they decide they want to outlaw those things to ensure that they don't have problems with them, why would you want to force them to not outlaw them. And also, letting the federal government make the law, just gives the federal government more power over the individual, because what if the federal government decide's to commit tyranny? What will you do then? Its alot easier to move to another province than it is to move to another country. |
| Date | 20:44:07, August 11, 2008 CET | From | Progressive Right-Wing Party (PRWP) | To | Debating the Ecology Decentralization Act |
| Message | Why hould the majority have the right to tell the minority how to live, if it doesn't hurt them in any way? If everyone in a province is absolutist (a person who doesn't drink any alcohol) then no law is needed. If there's even one person who drinks alcohol it's his choice and no-one should have the right to prohibit him from doing it. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 119 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 79 | |||
| abstain |
Total Seats: 67 |
| Random fact: The majority of nations in Particracy are "Culturally Protected" with an established cultural background. Only the "Culturally Open" nations are not bound by the rules surrounding culture. The Cultural Protocols Index should be consulted for more information about the cultural situation of each nation. |
| Random quote: "Politics is all about compromises and negotiations, nothing more, nothing less." - Augusto Amadeo, former Istalian politician |