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: Military Reforms Bill
Details
Submitted by[?]: Nationalist 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: November 2127
Description[?]:
| Increasing the strength of the Likatonian Armed Forces |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Discrimination in the military on grounds of race/religion.
Old value:: Any adult citizen can serve in the military, discrimination for racial or religious reasons is prohibited.
Current: Any adult citizen can serve in the military, discrimination for racial or religious reasons is prohibited.
Proposed: Candidates must be of a certain race/religion to have any place in the military.
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change National service.
Old value:: There shall be no mandatory military or civilian national service.
Current: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve either a term in the military or a lesser paid term of civilian national service, at their option.
Proposed: All adults upon completion of schooling must serve either a term in the military or a lesser paid term of civilian national service, at their option.
Article 3
Proposal[?] to change Women in the military.
Old value:: Women serve alongside men.
Current: Women can only serve in non-battle positions.
Proposed: Women can only serve in non-battle positions.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 21:47:03, October 17, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Party | To | Debating the Military Reforms Bill |
| Message | This actually would serve to weaken our military. |
| Date | 21:57:47, October 17, 2005 CET | From | AM Radical Libertarian Party | To | Debating the Military Reforms Bill |
| Message | We oppose all three articles. |
| Date | 00:47:09, October 18, 2005 CET | From | Front for State Prosperity | To | Debating the Military Reforms Bill |
| Message | Article one would restrict the size of the armed forces and create resentment from those discriminated against, who may be just as patriotic as the next person. Article two would create resentment and damage morale. It might even sow dissension into the ranks of the army. While in numbers our army would increase, it would be hampered in effectiveness. Article three would halve the size of our armed forces and again, create needless resentment. Besides, if a woman wants a non-battle position under current law, she can ask. In this part, we should leave this up to the choice of the individual. |
| Date | 14:24:34, October 18, 2005 CET | From | Commonwealth Workers Army | To | Debating the Military Reforms Bill |
| Message | The AAP fails to see how ANY of this measures would 'strengthen' the military. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||||
| yes | Total Seats: 88 | ||||||
| no |
Total Seats: 412 | ||||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: When your party holds the foreign affairs department, you can create new treaties. However, before writing anything new, it is a good idea to search for existing treaties which already accomplish what you desire. |
| Random quote: "The strength of a nation derives from the integrity of the home." - Confucius |