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: Bill regarding Cabinet Proposals
Details
Submitted by[?]: Rutanian Elitist Party
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: June 2704
Description[?]:
| The NPE is making this proposal in order to establish a rationalized order of the procedures of cabinet proposal. The NPE considers the actual situation as being chaotic. After an election every party can propose a cabinet, which results in chaotic negotiations without any significant value. We think that in case the President has the sovereign right to propose a cabinet then things become ordered. He must consult each party privately and by this method he can propose a cabinet which has support in the Parliament. We propose a procedure: 1. The President of the Commonwealth accepts the results of the elections. 2. The President negotiate with every party beginning with the smallest party and ending with the largest one. 3. After negotiating with each and every party the President proposes a cabinet The advantages of this procedure: 1. Every party has the opportunity to negotiate with one sovereign body. It will not occur that to parties agree without proper goals and commitments. 2. If only the President has the right to propose a cabinet, this procedure becomes an instrument of solving political crisis situations. If a cabinet does not function according the legislation of the country, the President can propose a new cabinet. 3. If every party has the right to propose cabinet, the act of proposing a cabinet lost its value. It is like the inflation. If much money is printed, it loses its value. 4. This sole right will not give more power to the President, but it will make the political life more predictable and rationalized. This is the goal of every democratic society. The NPE ask every party to handle this issue with utmost seriousness. The NPE considers this proposal a significant step in making our democracy more consolidated, our procedure more rational, predictable and ordered. The NPE makes this proposal now because the office of President is not held by the party and it will not hold it in the foreseeable future:). This guarantees the good intentions of the party. The NPE honestly thinks that this measure will serve the better functioning of the Commonwealt! Lord Klausenburg Chairman, National Party of the Elites |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The constitutional right and responsibility to propose a cabinet to the legislature.
Old value:: Each party can propose a cabinet coalition.
Current: Each party can propose a cabinet coalition.
Proposed: Only the Head of State can propose a cabinet coalition.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 16:34:27, January 29, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Restoration Party | To | Debating the Bill regarding Cabinet Proposals |
| Message | The Orange Party will support this proposal and firmly believe what the Republican Elitist Party has said. The current system is chaos, and this new system will at least give the smaller parties better representation. |
| Date | 17:30:30, January 29, 2009 CET | From | Kazari Militarist Movement | To | Debating the Bill regarding Cabinet Proposals |
| Message | However, we historically never had much chaos when it came to proposing coalitions, smaller parties not in power never really proposed their own cabinet. |
| Date | 20:07:38, January 29, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Elitist Party | To | Debating the Bill regarding Cabinet Proposals |
| Message | It might happen that the Kazari Militarist Movement does not observe how fragile our democracy is, but the mere existence of the KMM underlines this fact. Lord Klausenburg REP |
| Date | 21:25:48, January 29, 2009 CET | From | Kazari Militarist Movement | To | Debating the Bill regarding Cabinet Proposals |
| Message | I don't know what Lord Klausenburg is accusing us of, and we do not find the democracy of Rutania to be fragile. The Rutanian democratic government has a powerful tradition, that will not wither away. I can understand that we might be afraid of our democracy collapsing...we are facing turbulent times and we will agree with this bill, since the nation needs strong leadership. -Harrison Nguyen Phan Elfrink Vice Chairman of the KMM |
| Date | 22:44:31, January 29, 2009 CET | From | National Equality Party | To | Debating the Bill regarding Cabinet Proposals |
| Message | The NEP completley supports this bill. We feel that if the president is the one who will have to work with the cabinet directly, then he/she should have the sole right to propose it. |
| Date | 22:56:35, January 29, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Elitist Party | To | Debating the Bill regarding Cabinet Proposals |
| Message | The Republican Elitist Party is very glad to see that the political sphere agrees on our proposal. We would however emphasize that this would not give much more power to the President and would not make him a "strong leader"! That would hurt our democracy most. The keyword remains: rationalization Lord Klausenburg, Chairman, Republican Elitist Party |
| Date | 23:18:16, January 29, 2009 CET | From | Imperium Party | To | Debating the Bill regarding Cabinet Proposals |
| Message | Mr Speaker, We support giving more responsibility for the head of state. And we support the idea of him proposing cabinet coalitions. But during the past decades, the head of state, President of the Commonwealth, is more of a figure face, or state representative. Still, the President is automatically the Commander-in-chief of the Rutanian Armed Forces. But as the honourable gentleman of the KMM stated, the current state of democracy is stable and we have had a long history of good leadership. In response to this proposal, speaking on behalf of the IP, we say that the procedure in asking all parties with less/more seats is unessesary to determine the cabinet. Firstly there is no neeed for the President to hold meetings with rival parties/or parties in the opposite spectrum to determine who will be in the national cabinet. Each party has their own view in which the country should be run and there will be dire conflict in the cabinet. At the end of the day, the voters determine who will be President, and voters will be displeased when the President that they voted for is convining with a party that the voter didn't vote for and putting a member from that party to an executive position. It would be like giving a member of a party that recieved no votes in the election the role of Prime Minister, the voters did not vote for the party. voters do not want people that they didn't vote for to lead the country. And may I add a word of thought to the parliament that it is an awkward to see a party which renamed it self the Republic 'Elitist' Party have such plural policies. Veronica Zoratatt IP Leader |
| Date | 23:33:59, January 29, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Elitist Party | To | Debating the Bill regarding Cabinet Proposals |
| Message | The RepubicAN Elitist Party took knowledge of the IP's agruments. The currently if two parties reach an agreement and have 50%+1 of the votes propose a cabinet without even announcing the party before the proposal is published. This is not a normal, transparent, democratic situation. The President of the Commonwealth represents the nation because it is elected by the nation, and not by a party. So we would not doubt the benevolence of the Presidents... and in different cases the allience of the other paries would prevent him in taking illegal measure. If the President is only a symbolical function, it should be elected by the parliament. The REP considers worthless to comment on the IP's final remarks which are the results of pure dumbness Lord Klausenburg |
| Date | 23:47:44, January 29, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Elitist Party | To | Debating the Bill regarding Cabinet Proposals |
| Message | The RepubicAN Elitist Party took knowledge of the IP's agruments. The currently if two parties reach an agreement and have 50%+1 of the votes propose a cabinet without even announcing the party before the proposal is published. This is not a normal, transparent, democratic situation. The President of the Commonwealth represents the nation because it is elected by the nation, and not by a party. So we would not doubt the benevolence of the Presidents... and in different cases the allience of the other paries would prevent him in taking illegal measure. If the President is only a symbolical function, it should be elected by the parliament. The REP considers worthless to comment on the IP's final remarks which are the results of pure dumbness Lord Klausenburg |
| Date | 02:54:37, January 30, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Restoration Party | To | Debating the Bill regarding Cabinet Proposals |
| Message | Ladies and gentlemen, let's no degrade ourselves to such petty arguments. We believe that there should be fairer representation, yes. This proposal would add structure the procedure of choosing a Cabinet, however every President will have a different way of going about that. The IP is spot-on with their comments, however, greater representation is an ever-lasting goal of true republican systems. We believe greater representation can be achieved with this bill. We acknowledge the REP's point of having transparency and a democratic solution as well, but in the end--either way we go about this--a Cabinet will have to come to a vote. We will vote for this bill. Thomas Wenzeslaus |
| Date | 06:52:06, January 30, 2009 CET | From | Kazari Militarist Movement | To | Debating the Bill regarding Cabinet Proposals |
| Message | Our party has decided to vote against this after putting a few things in consideration and hearing the IP's arguements, our current system has worked wonders for centuries, we wish to change our vote to "Nay" |
| Date | 09:38:00, January 30, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Elitist Party | To | Debating the Bill regarding Cabinet Proposals |
| Message | May I ask the representatives of the KMM, which part of the IP's arguments exercised so deep influence on the opinion of the KMM? This is another manifestation of the unethical character of this pseudo-party. The REP respects the opinion of the IP, because it was expressed firmly and unchangeable. But the KMM after manifesting its authoritarian orientations by invoking the need of "strong leadership" changes its opinion and votes for chaos. The REP considers the defeat of this proposal the greatest failure of the party! Lord Klausenburg |
| Date | 16:44:31, January 30, 2009 CET | From | Kazari Militarist Movement | To | Debating the Bill regarding Cabinet Proposals |
| Message | Perhaps I'd like to remind the extraordinary gentleman, Lord Klausenburg that sometimes conclusions and our thoughts are not etched in stone, nor should they ever be. We have assessed the traditional system of proposing cabinets, even if a party who has seat in the high office of the president will still have to gain the approval of the parliament for his selected cabinet, the same goes for parties who do not have that title on their belt. Either way, there isn't much difference and the Rutanian democratic structure has always remained strong and cohesive. The Rutanian system is probably the strongest system in the world. Our democracy isn't as "fragile" as the REP would like us to think. Some of Lord Klausenberg's remarks is just shy of fear mongering. -Harrison Nguyen Phan Elfrink |
| Date | 00:00:42, January 31, 2009 CET | From | Imperium Party | To | Debating the Bill regarding Cabinet Proposals |
| Message | The President of the Commonwealth would have to open up a bill of debate to the Parliament to discuss cabinet positions. This should not be much like a consensus democracy, this would effectively give a small self-interested minority party power over decisions in cabinet. I'm not accusing the REP as a self-interested party, but other parties that have not been granted membership would step in say a "nationalist party" or an extreme far right/left party. This is the threat to democracy. As said by my honourable leader - Veronica Zoratatt - I have support for the head of state having more responsibility, and that he or she should make the decision of who is in cabinet and not othe parties. We would support except of the extraneous procedure. Abraham James Zoratatt Prime Minister |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 378 | |||
| no |
Total Seats: 221 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: "Jezvraljogadsrlji" means "Social" in the Jelbic languages. |
| Random quote: "I don't believe you need to be bitch to succeed in business" - Lucinda Redwood, former Luthorian-Dorvish businesswoman |